Luyện nói tiếng Anh bằng Shadowing qua video: AI Designed Viruses That Never Existed Before

Chọn chế độ luyện tập

Mỗi chế độ mở một phòng luyện tập toàn màn hình.

141 câu
Nếu các câu quá ngắn hoặc quá dài, hãy bấm Edit để chỉnh sửa.
1
Antibiotic resistant bacteria killed an estimated 1 .27 million people in 2019.
2
More than HIV slash AIDS or malaria.
3
And what I find really fascinating is that number is projected to keep climbing.
4
In fact, 40 million more deaths by 2050 if nothing changes.
5
Now there are some interesting things happening to hopefully change this.
6
I mean phage therapy it's using viruses to kill specific bacteria instead of broad -spectrum antibiotics.
7
People have been very hopeful about it, but to be frank, it's been slow for decades.
8
And the reason for this is because designing effective phages takes years.
9
But essentially, if a model can generate working candidates in days, that's a real medical breakthrough.
10
But it comes with kind of an unexpected security problem.
11
So let's take a step back here.
12
Scientists have used artificial intelligence to create brand new viruses, 16 of them.
13
Researchers at Stanford University and the Arc Institute say they trained an AI model called Evo on huge amounts of DNA data.
14
Then that information was used to create the new synthetic viruses.
15
On August 5th, a peer -reviewed study by Stanford was released
16
that showed how they trained a model to write DNA the same way, at its core, that GPT writes text.
17
The Stanford -based team is led by Brian He, who's working with the ARC Institute and bioengineering grad student Samuel King.
18
And it was he who built EVO2, which is a genome language model.
19
You can predict the next token, except the tokens are base pairs and the training data is the genetic code of viruses,
20
bacteria, plants and humans.
21
So the team used EVO2 to design candidate genomes for 5X1 74,
22
which is a virus that infects E coli, and the first DNA genome ever fully sequenced.
23
They essentially synthesized close to 300 of the model's designs.
24
Now out of those 300, 16 worked which meant new viruses that don't exist anywhere in nature.
25
I mean, some killing E coli more effectively than the original.
26
Now, the virus itself that was created is harmless.
27
It really only infects E coli.
28
But the paper, the Stanford paper that came out of it,
29
proving this came out to what I found very fascinating and a lot of others did.
30
It was from biosecurity researchers at John Hopkins and they basically call the findings a source of urgent biosafety and biosecurity questions.
31
Yeah, here is the actual technical problem.
32
DNA screening systems catch sequences by matching them against a database of known threats, things that already exist.
33
But this sequence has no match because nothing like it existed before it was created.
34
And to be fair, there's an industry -led screening system already.
35
I mean, the International Gene Synthesis Consortium has more than 40 gene synthesis companies that agreed to a shared screening protocol.
36
And even more than 175 developers of AI biodesign tools have
37
even signed commitments to only use the synthesis providers who follow those standards, which I think is pretty exciting.
38
People are seeing that this could be a real threat and taking action, hopefully ahead of time.
39
But all of that infrastructure really answers one question.
40
Does this sequence look like something we already know is dangerous?
41
Adoption is essentially voluntary and uneven, especially among smaller providers.
42
And none of it was built to catch a sequence that resembles nothing in any database.
43
I mean it's making something that doesn't exist yet.
44
And that's the real hole of Evo 2 exposed.
45
It's a mismatch between the rules that were set in place to catch these things and what something can do,
46
what a generative model can do and now produce something that hasn't existed before.
47
How do we put guardrails for that?
48
Running Evo 2, which by the way is open source right now, at full scale takes some serious hardware easily.
49
It's open source but it probably takes a quarter million dollars or more in compute.
50
It's really out of reach for someone working alone
51
but well within reach for a university lab or a startup
52
or a state program and
53
that barrier tends to drop over time
54
now one caveat worth knowing evo2 in its raw form couldn't reliably design a specific phage like phi x1 74.
55
it really doesn't roll off the tongue easy
56
it couldn't design one of those on its own
57
it has to take an extra step supervised to narrow the model's focus on that phage family.
58
So this was a deliberate targeted process by people who really understood what exactly the model needed to be doing.
59
Not a case of typing a prompt in and a virus comes out.
60
Much more complicated than that.
61
But it is still a real shift.
62
I mean, a predictive model tells you about biology that already exists, whereas a generative model invents biology that never did.
63
How does something like EVO2 actually work?
64
And why is this different from a normal biology AI tool?
65
I mean, they've been around for a while now.
66
Most AI biology tools are narrow.
67
AlphaFold predicts how an existing protein folds, which, yes, is extremely useful, but it's answering a question about something that already exists,
68
whereas EVO2 is generative.
69
For scale, to put this in perspective for you,
70
9 trillion nucleotides is enough genetic material to cover the entire human genome about 3 ,000 times over.
71
And EVO2 gets there with just 4 billion parameters, which is smaller than GPT -3s, going back a while now,
72
$170 billion, which should really tell you the power here came from what it was trained on, not from the size of the model itself.
73
Three years ago, four years ago, an LLM writing usable code was cool.
74
It's a cool party trick.
75
Here's how I can develop some code.
76
But now, I mean, it produces full production ready software.
77
Capability curves in AI don't move straight.
78
They move in jumps, in leaps.
79
And we've watched this happen again and again, especially when it comes to language and code.
80
And we're watching the opening move of the same jump when it comes to genome design in biotech.
81
Okay, I want to go back to the hit rate because I feel like we skimmed over that earlier.
82
16 out of 300.
83
It's not high for the 16 out of 300 viruses that actually took.
84
I mean, that puts this closer to the GPT -2 era than the GPT -4 era of the technology.
85
It's on the same curve though.
86
Every generative model improves on more data, better outputs, better architecture.
87
But let's zoom out to say two to five years.
88
What's going to happen with this?
89
I really don't think anyone's saying something like EVO2 is designing a human genome next year
90
but every capability curve
91
we've watched has moved toward the harder version of the problem
92
not away from it now bacteriophage run a few thousand base
93
pairs bacteria runs into the millions humans into the billions the gap between 16 working phage gmones
94
and a model that reliably designs genomes for more complex organisms is an engineering gap
95
and i really think it's not a a fundamental one
96
that will come with time all right
97
but this isn't the first time biology has hit a moment
98
like this back in february 1975 around 140 scientists actually gathered
99
to figure out what to do about a brand new capability
100
which at the time was recombinant dna
101
which is engineering genes across the species for a first time
102
now paul berg who was the organizer of it looked for an existing framework to follow and found nothing.
103
So instead the scientists wrote their own voluntary safety guidelines before any regulations forced them to.
104
And those guidelines really shaped biotech policy for the next 50 years.
105
How was 70s by the way 50 years ago?
106
It's wild.
107
But 50 years later scientists reconvened in the same convention center for a 50th anniversary meeting
108
and stated the reason was for the same kind of moment was currently happening
109
that happened in the 70s but this time with AI driven biotech.
110
Basically a call for the people building this to set guardrails before anyone makes them.
111
Evo2's own paper does exactly that.
112
It argues for oversight.
113
The open question I think on everyone's minds is whether
114
that instinct spreads to the next lab
115
that picks up an open source genome model
116
or what guidelines will they follow whether it will stay limited
117
to the one team careful enough in this case thank goodness to publish
118
it now i want to be clear here none of this necessarily makes ai designed medicine dangerous by default
119
i think there are so many incredible breakthroughs that we are seeing
120
because of this phage therapy against resistant infections could save lives
121
and that's the outcome his team is actually working towards
122
but it also the flip side you have to talk about
123
that because a technology
124
that can do enormous good can also do enormous harm from the same capability
125
and that is something
126
that we need to really have conversations around how to put guardrails for how to govern it before it scales not after.
127
A lot of coverage jumped straight to the scariest version of this story.
128
Researchers in the US have for the first time used artificial intelligence to design new viruses.
129
What could possibly go wrong?
130
There's also concern that the technology could create new and yet unheard of bioweapons.
131
Let's be honest here.
132
If somebody actually wanted to cause harm with a pathogen today, training a genome model from scratch is definitely not the easy path.
133
The big deal here isn't that phage is dangerous.
134
It's that the thing standing between a generative model
135
and a dangerous sequence just got proven not to work while the regulatory conversation is still stuck on chatbots.
136
Now, I'm not asking if this specific phage we spoke about is scary.
137
I'm asking whether you're comfortable with what it proves is now possible.
138
Leave in the comments your thoughts.
139
Do you like topics like this around biotech?
140
I'm kind of obsessed lately with biotech, so let me know.
141
All right, I'll see you in the next video.

Tải Ứng Dụng

Mọi thứ bạn cần để nói trôi chảy

Chấm điểm AIChấm từng câu nói
Luyện IPAThành thạo mọi âm
Từ vựngMở rộng vốn từ
Game Từ vựngHọc qua chơi
FOR YOU

Video gợi ý

Từ vựng và ghi chú luyện nói cho bài học này

Bài luyện nói này dựa trên video “AI Designed Viruses That Never Existed Before”. Những từ được nhắc lại nhiều nhất trong bài: model, Evo, genome, viruses, design. Video này có 6 câu và 1694 từ để luyện shadowing. Phần lời nói dài 10:54. Người nói nói với tốc độ tự nhiên, khoảng 155 từ mỗi phút, gần với hội thoại hằng ngày. Chỉ 78% số từ nằm trong 3.000 từ tiếng Anh thông dụng nhất, nên từ vựng khá khó.

Từ vựng quan trọng trong video

15 từ đáng học trong video, kèm phiên âm và nghĩa:

TừPhiên âmNghĩa
virus danh từ/ˈvaɪ.ɹəs/vi rút, siêu vi trùng
genome danh từ/ˈd͡ʒiː.noʊm/bộ gen
sequence danh từ/ˈsiː.kwəns/dãy
biology danh từ/baɪˈɑ.lə.d͡ʒi/sinh học, sinh vật học
gene danh từ/d͡ʒiːn/gen, di tố
scientist danh từ/ˈsaɪəntəst/nhà khoa học, khoa học gia
synthesis danh từ/ˈsɪnθəsɪs/tổng hợp
curve danh từ/kɚv/khúc quanh
researcher danh từ/ˈɹiˌsɝ.t͡ʃɚ/nhà nghiên cứu
harm danh từ/hɑːm/hại
narrow tính từ/ˈnæɹəʊ/hẹp, chật hẹp
scary tính từ/ˈskɛə.ɹi/đáng sợ
genetic tính từ/d͡ʒəˈnɛt.ɪk/di truyền
database danh từ/ˈdeɪtəˌbeɪs/cơ sở dữ liệu, CSDL
enormous tính từ/ɪˈnɔː.məs/khổng lồ

Cụm động từ bạn sẽ nghe

TừNghĩa
go back động từtrở lại
pick up động từnhặt, lượm

Những câu đáng luyện lại

Các câu ngắn, trọn ý trong video mà bạn có thể dùng lại khi giao tiếp hằng ngày:

  • Does this sequence look like something we already know is dangerous?
  • I mean, it's making something that doesn't exist yet.
  • How do we put guard rails for that?
  • I mean, they've been around for a while now.
  • Do you like topics like this around biotech?

Ngữ pháp trong video

Những cấu trúc người nói dùng nhiều nhất, kèm đúng cụm từ trong video:

Cấu trúcTrong video
Câu bị động be + quá khứ phân từ — nhấn vào việc xảy ra, không phải người làmis projected · was released · is led
Thì hiện tại hoàn thành have/has + quá khứ phân từ — việc đã xảy ra nhưng còn liên quan đến hiện tạihave been · have used · hasn't existed
Mệnh đề quan hệ who / which + mệnh đề — thêm thông tin về người hoặc vậtpeople who really · parameters, which is

Phát âm cần chú ý

Người nói dùng 19 dạng rút gọn, ví dụ don't, I'm, couldn't. Hãy nói theo dạng ngắn đúng như bạn nghe.

  • Âm “th”: synthesis /ˈsɪnθəsɪs/, breakthrough /ˈbɹeɪk.θɹuː/, gather /ˈɡæðɚ/, synthetic /sɪnˈθɛtɪk/, pathogen /ˈpæθəd͡ʒn̩/
  • Âm “sh” và “zh”: essentially /ɪˈsɛnʃəli/, artificial /ˌɑː.tɪˈfɪʃ.əl/, regulation /ˌɹɛɡjʊˈleɪʃən/, infection /ɪnˈfɛkʃən/, publish /ˈpʌblɪʃ/
  • Từ dài — đặt trọng âm cho đúng: biology /baɪˈɑ.lə.d͡ʒi/, capability /ˌkeɪ.pəˈbɪl.ɪ.ti/, essentially /ɪˈsɛnʃəli/, artificial /ˌɑː.tɪˈfɪʃ.əl/, voluntary /ˈvɑ.lənˌt(ɛ)ɹi/

Những âm người Việt thường gặp khó:

  • Cụm phụ âm cuối — đọc đủ từng âm, đừng nuốt âm cuối: sequence /ˈsiː.kwəns/, scientist /ˈsaɪəntəst/, fold /ˈfəʊld/, predict /pɹɪˈdɪkt/, commitment /kəˈmɪtmənt/
  • Âm /tʃ/, /dʒ/ và /ʒ/ — tiếng Việt không có, đừng đọc thành “ch” hay “gi”: genome /ˈd͡ʒiː.noʊm/, biology /baɪˈɑ.lə.d͡ʒi/, gene /d͡ʒiːn/, researcher /ˈɹiˌsɝ.t͡ʃɚ/, genetic /d͡ʒəˈnɛt.ɪk/
  • Âm /æ/ — mở miệng rộng hơn âm “e”: whereas /(h)wɛɹˈæz/, narrow /ˈnæɹəʊ/, gather /ˈɡæðɚ/, scratch /skɹæt͡ʃ/, barrier /ˈbæɹi.ə/

Cách luyện với video này

  1. Nghe hết video một lần, chưa cần nói, và ghi lại những từ bạn chưa biết.
  2. Bắt đầu ở tốc độ 0,75×, nói đuổi từng câu, rồi quay lại tốc độ bình thường khi đã quen.
  3. Ghi âm giọng mình rồi so với bản gốc, chú ý các từ như virus, genome, sequence.

Phương Pháp Shadowing Là Gì?

Shadowing là kỹ thuật học ngôn ngữ có cơ sở khoa học, ban đầu được phát triển cho chương trình đào tạo phiên dịch viên chuyên nghiệp và được phổ biến rộng rãi bởi nhà đa ngôn ngữ học Dr. Alexander Arguelles. Nguyên lý cốt lõi đơn giản nhưng cực kỳ hiệu quả: bạn nghe tiếng Anh của người bản xứ và lặp lại to ngay lập tức — như một "cái bóng" (shadow) đuổi theo người nói với độ trễ chỉ 1–2 giây. Khác với luyện ngữ pháp hay học từ vựng bị động, Shadowing buộc não bộ và cơ miệng phải đồng thời xử lý và tái tạo ngôn ngữ thực tế. Các nghiên cứu khoa học xác nhận phương pháp này cải thiện đáng kể phát âm, ngữ điệu, nhịp điệu, nối âm, kỹ năng nghe và độ lưu loát khi nói — đặc biệt hiệu quả cho người luyện IELTS Speaking và muốn giao tiếp tiếng Anh tự nhiên như người bản ngữ.

Phương pháp shadowing: đọc hướng dẫn từng bước đầy đủ →