charcircuit

6 ms·

1.
by charcircuit 3d ago
Because most mathematicians have not migrated to being AI native like most software engineers did. My post is trying to point out that these people's mind is still fixed in how the old world works and is not focused on the future where
2.
by charcircuit 3d ago
I disagree with the idea that they require serving both roles in order to be considered a proof.
3.
by charcircuit 3d ago
>The permissible shortcuts depend on who you are and what your values are. To solve this—to solve alignment—is irreducible complexity. This is why open source and decentralization of LLMs is important. Everyone can have their own LLM ali
4.
by charcircuit 3d ago
Having a device that can distribute ads to consumers is a distribution channel. Measuring ad impressions is a core part of ad distribution.
5.
by charcircuit 3d ago
This is why we may see the role of people wanting to advance mathematics instead of trying to do proofs themselves to push the frontier instead focus on improving these models to be capable of advancing mathematics.
6.
by charcircuit 3d ago
>The first assumption is wrong because to really solve a mathematical problem, providing a mere answer (even if formally certified) is not sufficient. What is missing is an intelligible proof that human mathematicians can understand and
7.
by charcircuit 3d ago
The market decides as it does for everything else. >When almost anyone can build software, the organizations that win will not be the ones that build the most It's not possible to A/B test a huge amount of software. The sample
8.
by charcircuit 4d ago
Are those people working on products or platforms? Platforms still have to be rock solid and deliver performance guarantees to the products built on top of them.
9.
by charcircuit 4d ago
>but a lot of folks sure like to create a strawman that anyone who wants to regulate OpenAI is somehow an EA/MIRI weirdo Anytime I see a random person on X who makes these kind of safety alarmism posts >90% of the time can be dir
10.
by charcircuit 4d ago
>I'd urge reading up on revealed preference and product discovery I'm not sure what point you are contesting. >It's worth picking this apart. They were rhetorical questions. >price-inelastic demand With this you coul
11.
by charcircuit 4d ago
>I don't recall asking Companies can develop new products without your advice. In fact consumers often don't know what they want. >people will pay whatever the price is Then why do businesses have sales? If prices don't
12.
by charcircuit 4d ago
How is it insane. Owning distribution channels has been valuable since the beginning of commerce. It's no different than a newspaper company saying they own the paper so they have the power to print ads in it.
13.
by charcircuit 4d ago
LLMs are good at finding the needle in the haystack. All efforts now should be in figuring out how to make LLMs get as good as possible at math.
14.
by charcircuit 4d ago
My phone clearly shows me when I'm on 5G vs 5G mmWave.
15.
by charcircuit 4d ago
>the world agreeing to self-destruct their valuations Did OpenAI releasing GPT-2 self destruct their billion dollar valuation or is it higher than ever today at $900B. The idea that releasing weights kills the future value that can come
16.
by charcircuit 4d ago
So they are able to get permits in parallel with building the the datacenter. That seems like a net good.
17.
by charcircuit 4d ago
Have you tried its image search? It's pretty good compared to its competitors. Google's image search fell off as they severely nerfed it.
18.
by charcircuit 4d ago
You don't have to read 32 million lines. You can just look at what got proved. The proof checker lets you trust those millions of lines you did not read.
19.
by charcircuit 5d ago
We are already there. Current AI is definitely capable of collecting new data and start training on that data to get a better model.
20.
by charcircuit 5d ago
OpenAI avoids this by formally verifying the proof. https://github.com/openai/NavierStokesAndEuler
21.
by charcircuit 5d ago
>but no one understands it, did it make a sound? Does your "one" only contain humans or does it also contain other AI systems. AI math is not a single monolithic thing, but a distributed one. I see value in sharing proofs even
22.
by charcircuit 5d ago
There are many points. >Building things we don’t understand is a sure path to facing consequences we can’t predict. We don't understand all of physics yet we were able to do plenty. Even before Newtonian physics we were still able t
23.
by charcircuit 5d ago
Linux distros that do use swap files do so statically. It doesn't handle dynamically growing and shrinking it like other operating systems.
24.
by charcircuit 6d ago
Anthropic should not be the moral arbitrator of which research should and shouldn't be allowed. They even think just writing a grant itself of research they don't like needs to be stopped.
25.
by charcircuit 6d ago
>you don't need to anything more than this You also have to check for things like sorry or defining axioms.
26.
by charcircuit 6d ago
Wouldn't that be chess players as the first victims?
27.
by charcircuit 6d ago
I'm not interested in issuing an automobile loan to you, but there are others who specialize in this. Even dealerships themselves can help you finance it.
28.
by charcircuit 6d ago
Roads should be built to handle the throughput needed of them for the next several years. Adding more cars doesn't add more traffic if throughput of the pipe is big enough.
29.
by charcircuit 7d ago
It is very common for malware to use recently registered addresses. They absolutely should be using it as a heuristic.
30.
by charcircuit 7d ago
I bet if you used the real Opus 5 it could one shot this.

More ›