Gaga Announces "Outer Bio"

[SavetheEarthNow 190]

On 8/22/2026 at 1:09 AM, Head Empty said:

AI has been used in the medical field because it can literally save lives. If properly trained it can predict or spot medical issues faster and more consistently than a human can, which it has done for decades now. Not only is that beneficial in everyday practice, but also to advance large scale medical research. 

This is a completely different animal them the AI we've been hearing about the last couple of years (so much so that I'm annoyed that they're both called the same thing). It's self-contained, it doesn't abuse personal data, it doesn't steal someone else's content.

That's complete propaganda. It's the scientists and doctors who have been discovering diseases, vaccines and everything else for centuries, it's been doctors who have discovered medical issues not AI. We don't need AI to identify disease and create vaccines and treatments, look how far humans have progressed the medical field since the discovery of penicillin for instance. Penicillin, a HUMAN discovery. To try to act like AI is so powerful is utter BS and it's exactly what the AI companies want us to think. AI is doing nothing that actual humans can do. 

[SavetheEarthNow 190]

1 hour ago, Petie Estie said:

OK so it's a biotech company run by michael that is using living skin tissue to test more compounds to find new active ingredients for skin care and stuff. gaga is on the board because they will use the developments in haus labs products. not anything crazy y'all. The AI is just a local model they use on the data they create. Not an LLM like chatGPT. It's just a way for a local machine they own to process the data and suggest new compounds to trial on the living skin tissue. 

None of what's discovered can be classified as "clean" or "vegan" though. Gaga has stressed how important being clean is with Haus Labs. Anything released by this Outer Bio or whatever they're calling it is produced with AI which is not a clean or vegan technology. AI is highly destructive to the environment, creates massive amounts of pollution, endangers ecosystems and the wildlife that lives in them. That's not clean or vegan.  And it's certainly not cruelty free, cruelty free implies no harm to animals, because like I said AI is destroying animal habitants, that in my books is cruelty. 

Edited Monday at 06:39 AM by SavetheEarthNow

[LGAte 1,021]

16 hours ago, LunaUniverse said:

Again, you’re downplaying her own autonomy and decisions by saying he’s controlling every choice she makes

When the album was being made he brought up an idea to her having heard the music, and Gaga could very easily had disagreed with him because it was a suggestion, not something that was forced onto her project.

You assume she’s changed when that shift away from being open started way before him due to overexposure and mental health reasons, and her interest in tech is nothing new. If you’re an authentic fan then you must know the amount of tech opportunities she took early in her career, yes? She didn’t just invest in cyber glasses or join Polaroid just because she was bored 

I actually think you are delusional if you don’t see what I’m talking about. But not everyone has situational awareness. 
 

 

[PartySick 173,670]

35 minutes ago, SavetheEarthNow said:

None of what's discovered can be classified as "clean" or "vegan" though. Gaga has stressed how important being clean is with Haus Labs. Anything released by this Outer Bio or whatever they're calling it is produced with AI which is not a clean or vegan technology. AI is highly destructive to the environment, creates massive amounts of pollution, endangers ecosystems and the wildlife that lives in them. That's not clean or vegan.  And it's certainly not cruelty free, cruelty free implies no harm to animals, because like I said AI is destroying animal habitants, that in my books is cruelty. 

Non-GenAI, like the one they're using, requires far fewer resources and much less power than genAI.

They'll likely produce no more waste than just standard computers which, if we're shaming them for that, we're all guilty  

Predictive AI doesn't require the hardware turnover that produces a ton of electronic waste, it doesn't produce nearly the same amount of carbon emissions, and it's cooled locally the same way any GPU would be.

[PartySick 173,670]

2 minutes ago, PartySick said:

Non-GenAI, like the one they're using, requires far fewer resources and much less power than genAI.

They'll likely produce no more waste than just standard computers which, if we're shaming them for that, we're all guilty  

Predictive AI doesn't require the hardware turnover that produces a ton of electronic waste, it doesn't produce nearly the same amount of carbon emissions, and it's cooled locally the same way any GPU would be.

What is the irony in me asking Gemini to explain this better  

This is primarily predictive and analytical machine learning, not generative AI.

In biotechnology platforms like Outer Bio's Yuna, machine learning is applied to laboratory data rather than open-ended content generation:

Pattern Recognition & Pathway Mapping: The models analyze biological assay data from living skin tissue to detect cellular responses, inflammation markers, and structural changes.

Predictive Bioactivity Scoring: Algorithms evaluate and rank candidate molecules based on how likely they are to trigger a desired biological mechanism before running physical experiments.

High-Throughput Screening Optimization: ML parses imaging and sensor data from automated lab hardware to filter out ineffective compounds quickly.

The Generative Nuance in Biotech

While some modern drug-discovery pipelines use specialized generative chemistry (such as diffusion models or variational autoencoders to design completely new molecular structures from scratch), Outer Bio's core workflow centers on evaluating and screening biological responses on live tissue.

Because these models are focused on classification, regression, and pattern matching over bounded datasets, their computational footprint is vastly smaller than the sprawling foundation models powering generative text or media tools.

Legit I just did more damage to the environment with this than Gaga and Michael are 

[bxr 2,543]

38 minutes ago, PartySick said:

Non-GenAI, like the one they're using, requires far fewer resources and much less power than genAI.

They'll likely produce no more waste than just standard computers which, if we're shaming them for that, we're all guilty  

Predictive AI doesn't require the hardware turnover that produces a ton of electronic waste, it doesn't produce nearly the same amount of carbon emissions, and it's cooled locally the same way any GPU would be.

33 minutes ago, PartySick said:

What is the irony in me asking Gemini to explain this better  

[ … ]

Legit I just did more damage to the environment with this than Gaga and Michael are 

I appreciate the clarification, but/and to be fair, their investor portfolio has a formidable slate of GenerativeAI companies, including, of course, Google (Gemini) competitor, OpenAI (ChatGPT), and Story.com (which I just found out existed through the Hawktail portfolio, but which looks to be a GenAI storybuilding platform)

Spoiler

 

It feels like something important to consider with this initiative is that none of this endeavor exists in isolation; OuterBio, as a private VC-backed start-up, is an integral piece of its investors‘ portfolios, as well as in relation to their fellow partner companies in the respective portfolios. Again, I‘m not versed in this arena at all, but from what I’m gleaning, these early stage investors reflect certain core values and directives that will guide OuterBio’s development and intended impact in the larger marketplace

I’m still learning about all of this along with the rest of us, though; so, these are just embryonic considerations that surface in context of thread commentary

Edited Monday at 07:54 AM by bxr

[LunaUniverse 4,615]

3 hours ago, LGAte said:

I actually think you are delusional if you don’t see what I’m talking about. But not everyone has situational awareness. 
 

 

Because what you’re talking about is bullshit man   Maybe the reason why she’s so distant now is because people like you write fanfiction about her life. 

[bxr 2,543]

12 hours ago, robotvoiceinalice said:

it practically is, skincare its part of the beauty industry no?

Good point … hm, I guess it comes down to practical use cases, and the whole “innovation” in how these skin care patents could have use across a range of fields and sectors (so, health care for instance, isn’t within the beauty industry, but does involve skin care (melanoma treatments, etc.))

Or, I guess a much more practical example would just be to look at which companies are featured in OuterBio’s investor portfolios and where there might be overlap with skin technology (since I think the primary emphasis is on OuterBio’s B2B (Business-to-Business) patent licensing).

So, I guess, just a simple example would be Anduril Industries, which is a Defense company, so, not within the beauty industry: 

Three of OuterBio’s investors invest in Anduril; Anduril sells AI and Robotics systems to the U.S. Dept. of Defense; the U.S. Dept. of Defense is currently engaged in multiple military campaigns; the skin is the first line of human defense; OuterBio profits from the B2B licensing of their lab-grown skin patents; OuterBio’s investor portfolio includes companies whose use of OuterBio’s skin patents would be mutually beneficial / profitable; Anduril sells products to a client who has immediate use for lab-grown human-derivative skin with enhanced durability that heals faster and lives longer; the licensing of this patent to Anduril would provide the capital, mutual profitability (for both OuterBio and Anduril, as well as their three early stage investors: Sozo Ventures, Liquid 2, and SV Angel), and consistency in product / patent use for the foreseeable future (the length of the military campaigns where the U.S. Dept. of Defense would incorporate skin patents to their infantry and/or AI/Robotics tactical systems).

Just an example of a non-beauty use case.

But, again, I have no idea how any of this works, so this is just riffing on the general info we have —really good question though … and again, the more I learn, the less I understand about this business stuff …

[Head Empty 27,184]

On 8/24/2026 at 8:32 AM, SavetheEarthNow said:

That's complete propaganda. It's the scientists and doctors who have been discovering diseases, vaccines and everything else for centuries, it's been doctors who have discovered medical issues not AI. We don't need AI to identify disease and create vaccines and treatments, look how far humans have progressed the medical field since the discovery of penicillin for instance. Penicillin, a HUMAN discovery. To try to act like AI is so powerful is utter BS and it's exactly what the AI companies want us to think. AI is doing nothing that actual humans can do. 

I'm not talking about AI replacing human research completely, but it has proven to be an effective tool that DOES help doctors deliver better results.

Keep in mind that this is AI in the "traditional" sense of the word, and not (just) the large language models that have become popular now.

For example: my brother in law is a doctor and has spend some time of his career towards training AI to recognize anomalies on lung scans. We're talking about 10 years back. He (among with tons of other doctors) would judge thousands of images and mark any anomalies he saw, so that the software could learn to do the same. In time, the AI could deliver more accurate readings than the human eye could, which leads to faster diagnostics and less mistakes. Thus saving lives.

So that's just ONE factual example of where software as a tool is a net positive. And it doesn't rely on those huge datacenters everyone is talking about: it's a contained and specialised system with privacy regulations in place. It's technically still AI, but completely different from something like ChatGPT.

Tools like this support medical professions immensely and reduce waiting times too.

Edited Tuesday at 06:43 AM by Head Empty

[phantasmas 12,427]

16 hours ago, bxr said:

But what would uber rich borderline eugenicists want with proprietary skin patents … ?

to stay youthful and white, duh

[bxr 2,543]

57 minutes ago, phantasmas said:

to stay youthful and white, duh

But why would a borderline naturally “superior race” need to manipulate biology to achieve this goal of staying “superior”?

ETA: I’M NEW HERE—I’m not versed in eugenics, borderline and/or otherwise … nor am I a white man, uber rich youthful and/or otherwise; just asking to get up to speed with the company and their portfolio camaraderie … but, tbh, it’s more of a rhetorical consideration; I guess the purpose of said skin patents is to present the evidence in due time 

Edited Monday at 06:54 PM by bxr

[phantasmas 12,427]

2 hours ago, bxr said:

But why would a borderline naturally “superior race” need to manipulate biology to achieve this goal of staying “superior”?

ETA: I’M NEW HERE—I’m not versed in eugenics, borderline and/or otherwise … nor am I a white man, uber rich youthful and/or otherwise; just asking to get up to speed with the company and their portfolio camaraderie … but, tbh, it’s more of a rhetorical consideration; I guess the purpose of said skin patents is to present the evidence in due time 

i dont wanna get into it because i'll just sound like a conspiracy theorist with hatred for white people lol

just be wary of rich people starting and funding companies (instead of using their $ to uplift communities) that have to do with safety, beauty and/or biology. oh and be extra wary if they start earning govt contracts. 

[PartySick 173,670]

On 8/22/2026 at 4:51 PM, phantasmas said:

 

this is exactly why ive been a Michael hater since the beginning, i knew he'd drag her into his circles to help secure  funding for stupid **** like this 

and mind u a lot of uber rich people who fund these kinds of things have ideologies that borderline eugenics  

 

Oh but when I said I didn't like Michael I was crucified  

[bxr 2,543]

5 minutes ago, PartySick said:

Oh but when I said I didn't like Michael [ … ]

Also PartySick: 

[PartySick 173,670]

Just now, bxr said:

Also PartySick: 

Every time I type "Michael" my predictive text fills in "Jackson"