pfdietz

4 ms·

31.
by pfdietz 29d ago
You've pulled that out of thin air, so I can dismiss it in the same spirit. No, there is no such requirement. Deal.
32.
by pfdietz 29d ago
That's not very much at all.
33.
by pfdietz 29d ago
No informed consent is needed to use previous research findings. This is the invention of IP that doesn't exist.
34.
by pfdietz 29d ago
It's amazing what people will do when their salaries are threatened.
35.
by pfdietz 1mo ago
Researchers don't have any obligation to not ruin the work of others. Research is a competitive arena, not kindergarten. Disparagement of the effort as "brute force" is just argument by insult. What matters is the result ob
36.
by pfdietz 1mo ago
s/Leaf/Lean/
37.
by pfdietz 1mo ago
And you seem to not realize that your unhinged argument impeaches whatever conclusion you're trying to justify. Good points don't require this sort of slimy misrepresentation. I don't work for any AI company.
38.
by pfdietz 1mo ago
I looked through your words and didn't see anything they should be ashamed of. It seems like you're trying to construct from mental vapor some justification for your prejudice.
39.
by pfdietz 1mo ago
Sure, we can show anything if we're allowed to make stuff up from personal outrage. Why should anyone else consider your personal opinion on this to have any weight?
40.
by pfdietz 1mo ago
Yes, let's lie and call something stealing, then pontificate about morality. At worst what OpenAI did was inconsiderate, but not referencing prior work is a minor academic sin. This is especially the case when AI is not playing the va
41.
by pfdietz 1mo ago
The consequences of that invasion debunks the claim it was done "for good reason". It seems to have been done without use of reason at all.
42.
by pfdietz 1mo ago
No one owns mathematics. It's not covered by IP law.
43.
by pfdietz 1mo ago
OpenAI didn't do anything wrong. Why should they apologize?
44.
by pfdietz 1mo ago
Leaf dumps out a proof object that can be verified to be correct. Absent a bug in the verifier, you can trust it, probably more than you can trust a human-produced proof. This is why Lean was a thing even before AI.
45.
by pfdietz 1mo ago
The interesting difference between alchemy and chemistry was a change in the expectation of how results would be obtained and communicated. That is also changing here.
46.
by pfdietz 1mo ago
How dare they defend themselves when attacked by their betters. The nerve of those peasants.
47.
by pfdietz 1mo ago
Another historical analogy: this is kind of like the transition from alchemy to chemistry.
48.
by pfdietz 1mo ago
Hans Moravec likely isn't surprised by this.
49.
by pfdietz 1mo ago
That's going to force formalization to become required for any new result to be taken seriously.
50.
by pfdietz 1mo ago
LLMs are excellent at doing searches of the math literature; presumably they'd also be good at doing searches of AI-generated results.
51.
by pfdietz 1mo ago
This sort of nonsense makes me root for the AI companies to set the edifice of organized math on fire.
52.
by pfdietz 1mo ago
It would be too transparently ridiculous.
53.
by pfdietz 1mo ago
I expected this. They prove a millenium result, but it doesn't count because they are bad people. It's this sort of thing that motivates people to burn down the institution you might be trying to defend.
54.
by pfdietz 1mo ago
If such reviews are required by legislation then you stop it in the courts; approvals without legally required steps are invalid. If they are not required by legislation then you just deal with the change. While you're thinking about t
55.
by pfdietz 1mo ago
In other news, evangelical christians ask scientists to stop publishing about evolution. We apparently have a moral obligation to protect existing power structures? Tao should maybe consider there are people who are indifferent to, or activ
56.
by pfdietz 1mo ago
> Puts the onus on the AI companies to provide a specific replacement mechanism, no? Why? If someone makes an innovation that undercuts the underpinnings of some existing institution, why are they are responsible for cleaning up its fai
57.
by pfdietz 1mo ago
That's causing objective damage. We don't invoke shame for behaviors that cause that.
58.
by pfdietz 1mo ago
Consistency is also important. Making arbitrary distinctions just to cloak personal preferences is hypocritical.
59.
by pfdietz 1mo ago
More modern techniques are less violent. I understand one heavily used in Kuwait was to place a ~10 meter hollow pipe above the blown out well so the flame could be displaced from the well head, then injecting water or nitrogen at the base
60.
by pfdietz 1mo ago
Shame is also a form of social control. Be ashamed you don't know your place, lower class person. Lack of required shame used to be called being "uppity".

More ›