magicalist

3 ms·

1.
by magicalist 5d ago
Alternatively, sounds like you're a user of the glasses and don't like what these comments might reflect on you if more people agree with them? Was my comment incorrect? You admit it's both possible to work around it, people
2.
by magicalist 5d ago
> Since the introduction of this safeguard, we’ve seen some people go beyond using tape to sophisticated efforts to modify or destroy the capture LED. We are continuously improving our ability to detect tampering, and now we’re updating
3.
by magicalist 6d ago
No it's not, though?
4.
by magicalist 7d ago
> Grothendieck was almost certainly wrong about his gifts here, and even if not, your mathematical ability and output isn't fully explained by your ability ceiling lol, see, it's unfalsifiable. No true abstraction ceiling.
5.
by magicalist 7d ago
> Making my complaint more general: I find modern math is exploring areas that are interesting to mathematicians, but increasingly irrelevant to society. Is it, or is it only the parts you hear about/pay attention to? > People
6.
by magicalist 7d ago
> This sounds a lot like you may have in fact succumbed to your abstraction ceiling It sounds more like you're turning a vibes based theory into a tautology. Hofstadter struggling with math for the first time in graduate school is
7.
by magicalist 8d ago
> Computation and computability is "the final frontier". Math is a "subset" of that. Maybe I'm misunderstanding you point, but I don't know how widely this would be held as true. Are you defining "math&
8.
by magicalist 12d ago
As they go on to explain, a human understandable proof is different than a human actually understanding the proof. That actual human understanding (like, in a brain of a human) is one of their stated goals. Producing human understandable pr
9.
by magicalist 13d ago
> The second was just for fun; it is fun. This is very far from the code we roll out at customers though. Which is fine, great even (I do the same thing!), but in trying different things outside your day job, it seems like you do und
10.
by magicalist 13d ago
> you need to resort to this kind of comment stalking to try to find ammunition for a general argument It's not a general argument, they made specific claims, but vague posted (and implying everyone else must be crazy) to the poin
11.
by magicalist 13d ago
> They're not "adding no value", the SLA is the value The code their Astra+Fable setup, automatically generated from requests customers leave in voicemails, is apparently so good they never correct it. If the stories bei
12.
by magicalist 13d ago
I mean they've boasted[1] about their generated code being so good that they add basically zero value and that they're riding out the rentseeking for as long as possible. Meanwhile they've apparently played with LLM porting o
13.
by magicalist 14d ago
intentionality was not what you were addressing, nor was it what the GP was clearly responding to.
14.
by magicalist 14d ago
Strict liability literally is crimes that don't require a guilty mind. That's different (sometimes) when, for example, you're found guilty of criminal negligence leading to someone being injured. Prosecutors don't have
15.
by magicalist 14d ago
> The same EPA that under 5+ administrations has taken no material action to reduce the effects of climate change? Huh? The endangerment finding was in 2009. The problem is that we have a very litigious set of polluters and then we ele
16.
by magicalist 15d ago
> It's this sort of thing that motivates people to burn down the institution you might be trying to defend. lol, yes, this sort of thing is what many people who voted for Trump were saying, and things are going great for them. &gt
17.
by magicalist 15d ago
I mean, let's say you spun up a swarm of agents to rewrite a large component of a well used open source library to be memory safe. You could dump it in a big PR and walk away (we all know how that would go), or you could try engaging,
18.
by magicalist 15d ago
I mean, this is the problem with analogies and trying to use them to prove things, right? People working through problems from an analysis book with their friend (or an LLM) is not the same as research mathematics. People playing in a chess
19.
by magicalist 15d ago
> The fact is these fields are supported by society because of the benefits to everyone else. Once the same results can be achieved in a cheaper and faster way that is what will be done. Maybe it's worth double checking that you k
20.
by magicalist 15d ago
> And OpenAI directly addressed these plagiarism claims, and called them impossible Funny, you were telling me two days ago that on the contrary, "it’s genuinely impossible to know how much of Buckmaster’s Codex data is in OpenAI’
21.
by magicalist 15d ago
> the Anthropic researcher is clearly pushing the case against Open AI Things like the nytimes interview are with Buckmaster, who works at NYU, not Alpöge. I saw a couple of tweets from him over the last week. Any chance of clarifying
22.
by magicalist 16d ago
> It's not obvious to me that's an unethical thing to do In terms of work in mathematics, something I personally would not do based on ethical grounds would be to hear a rumor that some researchers are taking a certain appr
23.
by magicalist 16d ago
There are some mixed up things in your post, maybe double check next time, especially before quoting anyone, as you really undermine your point even if you're directionally right. > Buckmaster rejected fame and $1M only because doi
24.
by magicalist 16d ago
> Eh, I hope Apple continues to provide this and it forces the needed discussion about how two-party consent requirements are nonsensical Really disagree on this, I think all states should be two party consent, personally. > Why sh
25.
by magicalist 17d ago
> No, it’s genuinely impossible to know how much of Buckmaster’s Codex data is in OpenAI’s training set. Let's check if an OpenAI employee agrees with you: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49614154 Nope. Expen
26.
by magicalist 17d ago
> There is no crease at all! Like first reply he literally says > There is sorta one at some slight angles but basically no crease And someone replied with a picture of it showing the crease. It's probably fine and you don&#x
27.
by magicalist 17d ago
> infuriating to see spoiled developed world complaints sometimes Maybe glance back at your comment history and find you mostly are complaining about very developed world things and investigate why there might be a disconnect between t
28.
by magicalist 17d ago
> You're making a classic a burden-of-proof fallacy This is incorrect, and you invoke Russell's teapot incorrectly too. It would only apply if the accusation rested solely on the fact that neither of us have evidence against
29.
by magicalist 17d ago
> They aren't arguing against open science, they are trying to educate you on the history of science. It's always been this way. Always been what way? And how does that contrast to what Tao said (since it was apparently &quot
30.
by magicalist 17d ago
> Nothing in their comment reads to me as "arguing against" If competition is somehow the opposite of "centuries of traditions of open science", and "mathematics has always been highly competitive", then o

More ›