omnicognate

4 ms·

1.
by omnicognate 5d ago
I see. I'm a real atheist then, and Richard Dawkins does not speak for me.
2.
by omnicognate 5d ago
What's a "real atheist"?
3.
by omnicognate 5d ago
Interesting, didn't know that history. I've used algo diff but in unrelated fields. I think it's a technique that has been independently discovered several times and has terribly inconsistent terminology across domains as a r
4.
by omnicognate 5d ago
I'm not familiar with the details of backprop in neural networks, but AIUI it's an application of automatic/algorithmic differentiation, which comes in two modes: forward and reverse. Reverse mode is harder to implement as yo
5.
by omnicognate 7d ago
The people building AI claim it will surpass human intelligence in all respects and prerhaps kill us all. Should we just cease all human activity on the basis of what AI might do in future? Personally, I doubt AI can surpass a good human
6.
by omnicognate 8d ago
Hilarious - a mathematical result that afaict has nothing whatsoever to do with AI, and 75% of the comments are about AI, including this one!
7.
by omnicognate 8d ago
My point is what I said. Without understanding you are only able to say your proof is "likely" to be correct. It's clear from your writing that you understand that your proof will only be accepted once thoroughly reviewed by
8.
by omnicognate 8d ago
> If this file is correct and Lean kernel is correct, the proof is correct There are two ifs in this sentence.
9.
by omnicognate 8d ago
> I genuinely invite a refutation. > So, assuming my proof doesn’t rely on a Lean kernel bug, it’s likely to be legit too. He lacks the understanding to verify his solution properly, and has to lean on those who do have the understa
10.
by omnicognate 8d ago
Right, it's just a rather unfortunate use of language. There is a sense in which "being like something" means that, but usually it means, well, being like something.
11.
by omnicognate 8d ago
> something it's like to be you This phrase comes up a lot in discussions of consciousness and I've never understood it and never seen why it's supposed to encapsulate the idea. It isn't "like" anything to b
12.
by omnicognate 11d ago
Missing the point by the widest conceivable margin. The million dollars is an award from the Clay Institute. It doesn't represent value in the proof itself, but rather is offered as a reward for an activity that, when done the human wa
13.
by omnicognate 11d ago
I copied it from the comment I replied to, which has since been edited.
14.
by omnicognate 11d ago
That AI companies are pouring huge resources into strip mining outstanding problems for bragging rights rather than introducing the technology responsibly in a way that benefits the field. Somebody will now respond that it doesn't matt
15.
by omnicognate 11d ago
> But that doesnt mean it is not useful. If you think the declaration is saying AI is not useful it's you that "does not understand the concrete problem that mathematicians are upset about". Terence Tao uses AI heavily and
16.
by omnicognate 11d ago
Not sure why you're down the bottom when the current top post says pretty much the same thing. I agree that the reevaluation and refocusing that is being forced by AI is one the maths establishment could fruitfully have had a long time
17.
by omnicognate 12d ago
That's pretty cool, especially the fact that it chose the problem itself. The uncovered text, though: > O GOD UPHOLD KING CHARLS THE SECOND AND MAKE HIM THE SUPREME RULER OF THIS LAND That's like working out a cereal box cipher
18.
by omnicognate 13d ago
Quite. And unfortunately they opted for a clever, punny title that implies the exact opposite of what the article says.
19.
by omnicognate 13d ago
> Researchers also found that such a world could survive its passage through the Sun's outer layers while losing very little mass, which suggests that planets may leave detectable fingerprints inside their host stars long after they
20.
by omnicognate 13d ago
The number of downvotes reflects the fact that people don't consider just calling something "dumb" a worthwhile contribution to the discussion.
21.
by omnicognate 13d ago
> a lot of people don't understand that the joy of making something is not coding but actually being able to build anything I want I expect "a lot of people" understand perfectly well that that's where the joy comes f
22.
by omnicognate 13d ago
It's a clever pun, but it implies maths is ended, which is the exact opposite of what the article says. Given how many people responded to strawman misinterpretations of the Fields medallists' statement yesterday I don't expe
23.
by omnicognate 14d ago
His view is the "capability gap" one, and you can just read the the statement and Tao's other writings for far more eloquent explanations of the difference between a raw LLM proof dump and real mathematical insight, and what
24.
by omnicognate 14d ago
Not even vaguely related to the point being made in the statement.
25.
by omnicognate 14d ago
You seem determined not to understand this, but to spell it out even further: The point is not that the companies are deliberately trying to harm maths but that in pursuing their own goals, which are different to those of mathematicians, th
26.
by omnicognate 14d ago
I couldn't agree more. The way everyone thunders towards "replace" instead of "improve" is depressing.
27.
by omnicognate 15d ago
It's not a simple matter of "becoming good at", and yes, I could very well have similar concerns, depending on how it impacts the field. The statement itself mentions that such concerns exist in many other fields. I doubt Ope
28.
by omnicognate 15d ago
The statement is not about AI but about the behaviour of AI companies. OpenAI have put vast resource into solving open maths problems: many millions of dollars of compute just on the Navier-Stokes result, plus whatever they spent on the br
29.
by omnicognate 15d ago
I don't see anything stated as fact (without quote marks) here solely on the basis of Trump having said it, and I see use of quote marks for things he has said, eg. 'Trump says Iran war will end "immediately" after US mi
30.
by omnicognate 15d ago
What corresponds to land in the AI analogy to this?

More ›