Certhas

5 ms·

1.
by Certhas 5d ago
Mathematics has enough cultural capital within the AI companies that they get to have this "advisory board". Nobody else is getting that. When/If the severe impacts on labor materialize, workers won't get an advisory boa
2.
by Certhas 8d ago
Are you talking about the posted article? I agree that it was a fun read, but it did not present any mathematics at all. Like, none. Its not that the author not being an expert made it easy to understand, it's that there was nothing ma
3.
by Certhas 8d ago
If I repeatedly call an LLM in a loop with a markdown document it can edit, would that make it qualify for you? If I give an LLM to compact its context window, so the context it carries can evolve iteratively over time as more and more thin
4.
by Certhas 9d ago
Ultimately, the brain is just a bunch of neurons activating in a specific pattern. This observation does not really tell us anything though. It doesn't acknowledge the difference between a 2500 Neuron fruit fly brains and a human brain
5.
by Certhas 10d ago
Good science, properly digested and presented takes time. The idea that anything other than a breathless blog post about the latest model snapshot is useless is really poisonous to proper debate on AI issues
6.
by Certhas 14d ago
Anthropomorphizing is problematic because a human mind is a very bad model for what LLMs are. A lawnmower is a much much much worse model.
7.
by Certhas 16d ago
I have never come across this position argued seriously. I would also consider it absurd, as then the question whether we have consciousness depends on unknown properties of fundamental physics (which is not incompatible with determinism, s
8.
by Certhas 16d ago
I am a physicist. I worked (briefly) on foundations of quantum mechanics. I discussed compatibilism extensively with philosophers. I have _never_ come across the position you seem to take here, that determinism has bearing on the question i
9.
by Certhas 16d ago
Nonsense. There was one proposal for relevant quantum effects in brain dynamics, and that turned out to be not relevant. Even if they were, you could substitute all quantum randomness with pseudo randomness and obtain an absolutely indistin
10.
by Certhas 16d ago
Your car analogy is very, very confused. If a simulation of a car can get you from A to B, requires the same steering, fuel and servicing, gives you the same tactile feedback, is it a car? Of course "I care about humans because I am hu
11.
by Certhas 16d ago
Videos and LLMs are not deterministic in the same sense at all. LLMs are deterministic in the same sense as biological processes. And a faithful simulation of a brain would have all the properties you note.
12.
by Certhas 16d ago
I generally agree about the problem with anthropomorphizing. But I don't think Anthropic are doing that. They explicitly write "in biological entities this would be considered a sign of consciousness, but we don't know how to
13.
by Certhas 16d ago
I like it, and it points in the right direction, but is not directly true: The markers are about interactions, how biological organisms behave in certain test situations. But it speaks to the central question: Are the tests adequate? Or are
14.
by Certhas 16d ago
Humans are biological machines that generate further humans. Lawyers and diplomats and politicians and bureaucrats are humans, that only generate text. We are seeing LLMs have cognitive abilities that significantly exceed human abilities. A
15.
by Certhas 16d ago
I believe it's deeply serious, and the scientifically correct stance. Especially the observation: "Claude exhibits markers in its behaviors, self-reports, and internal representations that we would consider welfare-relevant if obs
16.
by Certhas 16d ago
What's your definition of sentient? Or, maybe more precisely, consciousness? I think it's reasonable to at least start thinking about these questions. It has long been established that LLMs have good theory of mind [1]. And there
17.
by Certhas 18d ago
Please explain how this has nothing to do with LLMs and Computers?
18.
by Certhas 18d ago
If I am reading your question correctly you are asking about chat interface Vs Codex/Claude code? If so, in my experience Codex/Claude code use is widespread for mathematicians who are seriously using these tools.
19.
by Certhas 18d ago
This is OpenAI though. There were zero visible consequences to them unleashing a swarm of agents on the public internet. We will see how it goes down but my prior is zero consequence and a statement along the lines of "Isn't our A
20.
by Certhas 19d ago
The point of the local model in the context of the article was to argue that you can't ban these capabilities. Making datacenters and public clouds only rent GPUs to a restricted list of people, while tightly monitoring what people do
21.
by Certhas 22d ago
This is such an absurd take given what we know about the hugging face attack. The problem has emphatically not been that someone was misusing the technology.
22.
by Certhas 23d ago
I spent/spend a lot of time in the UK. I already agreed (as did the UK Government audit) that there was a reluctance to investigate due to fear of being racist. But the official inquiries have happened, and they were initiated by the l
23.
by Certhas 23d ago
In Germany we have a term "besorgte Bürger" - concerned citizens. They just share their concerns. Concerns about all the brown people. Immigrants. Crime. Just sharing concerns. But the blog posts by DHH that are being linked here
24.
by Certhas 28d ago
Feels like mostly LLM work...
25.
by Certhas 1mo ago
Imagine Anthropic gives you Opus of 6 months ago but at much higher speeds and much lower cost (that they might or might not pass on). Would you use it?
26.
by Certhas 1mo ago
It's not? Schwarzschild has a space-like singularity. That's the wiggly horizontal line at the top left of the diagram. If you are in the black hole you can't avoid hitting it. Seems to be exactly what the paper is remarking
27.
by Certhas 1mo ago
As is nicely visualised by it's Penrose Diagram, e.g. https://jila.colorado.edu/~ajsh/insidebh/penrose_schw.gif
28.
by Certhas 1mo ago
I didn't realize that, thanks! After looking at Wikipedia for a bit it seems there are two phases under the PCT, an international phase that is sort of like the main part of a patent application, and then the national phase that actual
29.
by Certhas 1mo ago
The whole EU censorship rhetoric is almost always devoid of facts and examples. I feel like it is mainly sustained because US people like the narrative that theytl are the free(TM).
30.
by Certhas 1mo ago
Presumably it's an "international patent" filed in Brazil. You don't have to file your patent in every jurisdiction. There have been treaties for recognising each others intellectual property rights since the late 19th c

More ›