thanks for engaging but tbh just post your own articles. i actually talked to Richard after reading quite in depth and reproducing his code results myself, and

thanks for engaging but tbh just post your own articles. i actually talked to Richard after reading quite in depth and reproducing his code results myself, and do think he's brilliant. my point is he gets the punch line of these math academia papers, much faster. that's all. easy to call things "vague slop", hard to be right first. Jensen's def'n of intelligence "can you see around corners and predict the future?" kinda all that matters at this point. just an fyi. congrats on your nitpicking of what math counts as math lol here's my own paper: https://computerfuture.substack.com/p/demoting-laplaces-demon https://computerfuture.substack.com/p/demoting-laplaces-demo... (pdf - https://drive.google.com/file/d/1s4VER7SNjUFuCBodX_0myXRpNCWwfASV/view https://drive.google.com/file/d/1s4VER7SNjUFuCBodX_0myXRpNCW... ) and here's my MIT degree on the blockchain somewhere: https://trattner.github.io/img/18c-diploma.png https://trattner.github.io/img/18c-diploma.png feedback welcome from nits... you made zero comments on ghostbasin.com which makes some extraordinary claims too.