Recommendations you can check.
by AI Futures Project
Who uses, recommends or left AI Futures Project, in their own words: each a verbatim quote with a link to where it was said.
2 people
All of it is written with a much lower barrier to entry than my work, and I find the writing consistently strong and interesting.
A post going through the blogs and newsletters he recommends and why, written after declining offers of reciprocal recommendations.
2025-06-30·thezvi.substack.com ↗
The team behind AI 2027 and Plan A; the best place to learn about AI forecasting and what might be in store.
Scott Alexander's own recommendation blurb for the newsletter AI Futures Project, on their Substack's recommendations page.
2025-04-17·astralcodexten.com ↗
Every entry is a verbatim quote and a link to the public post it came from. Nothing is paraphrased. If it is not on record somewhere public, it is not here.
The verdict is what they actually said: loved and liked are explicit; recommended means they told others to get it; uses means they only say they use it; read is a book on their public shelf with no verdict; mixed and disliked are kept too.
A dashed affiliate link, sponsored or their own label means the post disclosed a relationship. It is shown, never hidden.
The shading behind a date shows how dated a recommendation is for its kind of thing.
The shading behind a date shows how dated a recommendation is, for its kind of thing. Fully green is recent. It drains a quarter at a time as the post gets older, and is empty once it reads as dated.
What counts as old depends on the thing. A laptop praised four years ago has been replaced twice; a book loved twenty years ago is probably still loved. The shading is gone after about:
Stripes mean the post carries no date and the date shown is an estimate. No date at all, no shading.