calf

12 ms·

241.
by calf 1y ago
This is sloppy, I was asking about scientific consensus from the perspective of the prior commenter as a conference-goer. I am not asking for opinions bordering on ad hominems of Hinton or any other scientist, please refrain from that style
242.
by calf 1y ago
As to general consensus, Hinton gave a recent talk, and he seemed adamant that neural networks (which LLMs are) really are doing reasoning. He gives his reasons for it. Is Hinton considered an outlier or?
243.
"Brand New Result Proving Penrose and Tao's Uncomputability in Physics" [video](youtube.com)
3 points by calf 1y ago|1 comments
244.
by calf 1y ago
paper link: https://arxiv.org/abs/2507.07696 "Turing complete Navier-Stokes steady states via cosymplectic geometry" 2025-07-10
245.
by calf 1y ago
As a bicultural Chinese Canadian with a fancy STEM background, this is a terminally flawed argument because it fundamentally allows capitalism to decide which cultural norm is socially valid. It is shortsighted, self-centered, and actually
246.
by calf 1y ago
Then why is it clear that they struggle at life? Just because they have bad cognitive logical skills? I don't buy that argument.
247.
by calf 1y ago
It still seems fake, whenever I go in-depth taking multiple turns with ChatGPT it ends up revealing its "yes-man" attitude. It just hides it better in newer iterations.
248.
by calf 1y ago
If a special interest group is acting in bad faith, then it is still incorrect and confusing to frame it as "they just don't like that thing". We should just be saying they are acting in bad faith, weaponizing arguments, etc.
249.
by calf 1y ago
When you saying something like "we are talking about assured suffering" it is so unrigorous I cannot even begin to reply. Maybe read some philosophical literature. Or just the 5 w's like in grade school. Who suffers? Why is s
250.
by calf 1y ago
None of your arguments fly. Try to think like an programmer--kick the corner case of the arguments. I'm not suggesting anything other than pointing out that most arguments on here have been well trodden by ethicists and even they have
251.
by calf 1y ago
Stating something is sophistry is not tone policing. Pointless to explain this to those who lack critical thinking skills in the first place. Rather, it is you who are doing the policing from a self-assured conservativism so common to the H
252.
by calf 1y ago
I find it extremist and inflammatory this reoccurring—frankly conservative—tendency on HN to police any strong polemic criticism as "hyperbole" and "inflammatory". People should learn to take criticism is stride, not eve
253.
by calf 1y ago
So what if one doesn't exist yet and another could be? Then both are possibilities. Your sentences look superifically logical but they make no actual sense.
254.
by calf 1y ago
Using a loaded term such as "defect" is exactly eugenics sophistry.
255.
by calf 1y ago
I couldn't stand Cal Newport's self-help articles 10 years ago, I am triggered today seeing this "article" on the top of HN
256.
by calf 1y ago
(note: original seems written in Chinese only, so I used Google Translate to read it)
257.
Hinton's Oxford Lecture and Chomsky's Poverty of Incentives Theory(journal.bisu.edu.cn)
1 points by calf 1y ago|1 comments
258.
by calf 1y ago
Except reducing the first cause does nothing about whether air pollution is a nontrivial factor. And nonsmoker cancers are a nontrivial proportion since they account for 10-25 percent of lung cancer worldwide, please just read the article.
259.
by calf 1y ago
I see this distinction a lot, but what is the fundamental difference between competition "math" and professional/research math? If people actually knew then they (young students, and their parents) could decide for themselves
260.
by calf 1y ago
Furthermore, I see that since a) this is your second comment now making a poor argument (the other was pedantic nitpick about Dune), and b) you are not the person I was interesting in conversing with, I'll just write you off as being c
261.
by calf 1y ago
I'm honestly offended that you attribute my criticism to some failure of understanding, and then your appeal to authority. Appealing to authority suggests you have the same bias as "top researchers" school of thought. Ad homi
262.
by calf 1y ago
Slowing down isn't necessarily bad, maybe slow programming (literate/Knuth comes to mind as another early argument) encourages better theory formation. Maybe programming today is like fast food, and proper theory and abstraction (
263.
by calf 1y ago
All valid but what I don't get is why our top AI researchers don't get what you just said. They seem out of touch about what alignment really means, by the lights of your argument.
264.
by calf 1y ago
Fine, imagine Measure of a Man in TNG. My general point stands.
265.
by calf 1y ago
I skimmed one of the Berkeley Simons AI seminars (on YouTube) where one of the top experts (iirc one of the Canadian academics) who has pivoted his work to AI safety because he genuinely fears for the future of his children. My objection is
266.
by calf 1y ago
I'll bite; There was a Kurt Jaimungal interview yesterday explaining that the Navier-Stokes fluid equations are not only unpredictable (chaotic), but also uncomputable (in the Turing sense). (if I recalled it correctly) But I take that
267.
Study flags Canada's growing burden of chronic gut disease(ctvnews.ca)
7 points by calf 1y ago|1 comments
268.
by calf 1y ago
Never used MacDraw, but I remember installing and using ClarisWorks in middle/high school, I never did actual programming at that age, but I loved playing around with the Mac's word processing, drawing, painting programs, making l
269.
by calf 1y ago
Well, previously you said that it (presumably "it" broadly refers to spatial reasoning AI) is a "high dimensional complex type cutting problem". You said this is obvious once explained. I don't see this as obvious,
270.
by calf 1y ago
This is as rhetorically valid as knowing about UFOs, it smells of crackpot science.

More ›