ndriscoll

8 ms·

1.
by ndriscoll 3d ago
The worker does have agency. They did not have to take a job installing mass surveillance systems. They're directly doing the bad thing, and the "harassers" are literally doing the same thing the worker is doing, but back to
2.
by ndriscoll 4d ago
I don't see turning in piles of Lean as bad-faith somehow. They were first, and they did prove the result (assuming no hidden exploit deep in the middle). The thing they produced is just different, and both giant raw proofs and distill
3.
by ndriscoll 4d ago
e.g. Zenni has sold $7 glasses for like 20+ years. They appeared shortly after Luxotica started buying retailers. If there's a problem, it's that advertising reduces consumer information (basically economic jamming) and distorts m
4.
by ndriscoll 4d ago
Maybe your management has no idea what you work on. If so that's its own issue. Or maybe they do, and the person trying to take credit for more than they did just looks like an idiot. Like I said, I intentionally give throwaway PoC cre
5.
by ndriscoll 4d ago
Who said anything about unpaid? I'm pretty sure professors don't show up just for fun. Our taxes pay them. I'd be happy to do the job. Actually I still dabble recreationally (clarifying Codex's Lean proofs, even!). But l
6.
by ndriscoll 5d ago
Your analogy is far enough away from the way that the real world works that I'm not sure that I can really even strain my experiences to fit within it. Sure, I guess that would be annoying? But mathematicians define their field. They&#
7.
by ndriscoll 5d ago
We are given time though. Maybe not at some small sweatshop? But at least at big companies all the jobs are salaried, and either no one cares how exactly you spend your time, or they explicitly say it's fine to spend some time learni
8.
by ndriscoll 5d ago
There are vanishingly few research mathematician positions and it's one of the most competitive fields, so no. But I'm not sure how that's relevant. As the OP says, usually the value of a proof is not the knowledge that somet
9.
by ndriscoll 5d ago
One of the awesome things about LLMs is they make it quick and easy to make PoCs, so yes. Proving that an approach will work before spending a bunch of deep design effort is absolutely valuable. Your exact scenario is something I've li
10.
by ndriscoll 5d ago
But it does produce value. We now have an explicit solution and even a proof. Humans can then work on clarifying why it's true. Unsurprisingly, not all that different from software, where models can generate working code just fine. The
11.
by ndriscoll 5d ago
Or the joke about two economists on a walk paying each other $100 daring the other to eat dog shit, increasing the GDP by $200 and creating 2 jobs.
12.
by ndriscoll 5d ago
We're talking about professionals here. People who (at least in the US) often make several multiples of the median worker. Competence is assumed, and every company I've been at has had programs to pay for additional school if the
13.
by ndriscoll 6d ago
I don't see why you'd be any less "entitled" than you would be to go outside and play in the dirt or watch birds. What difference does it make to them? They've told you they don't want you as a customer anyway,
14.
by ndriscoll 7d ago
It's not a tiny minority; at least in the US, ~1/4 mothers stay at home, or for mothers with pre-school children, it's ~1/3. It's actually quite normal outside of maybe certain urban professional circles, and spans
15.
by ndriscoll 7d ago
It doesn't show that. Subsidies will shift the margin of who can afford to have a stay at home parent, so if being raised by a parent is better than childcare, you expect people on the margin to lose out. This is in contrast to somethi
16.
by ndriscoll 7d ago
I only have an undergrad in math, so very little understanding, but I'd be pretty surprised if it couldn't do forall just as well. Like, say it found this counterexample which relies on axial stretching or whatever approach. Then
17.
by ndriscoll 8d ago
Attributing training data seems pointless for trustworthiness. The way you trust a model is the same way you trust a human; you ask it to: 1. Provide a chain of reasoning from agreed premises. These days LLMs can even do this airtight w
18.
by ndriscoll 9d ago
I suppose, but then your definition of composition requires checking compatibility of codomain/domain instead of it being automatic (and your definition of composition does not fit the shape to form a category), which seems way worse t
19.
by ndriscoll 9d ago
Typically one defines relations before functions anyway (unless you're doing type theory/programming, in which case types matter), and relations also offer a fix (the empty relation from the empty set is left inverted by the empty
20.
by ndriscoll 9d ago
But f's codomain is B, and g isn't a function on B, so you can't compose them in the first place. And saying "well yeah but you could compose f's restriction" is exactly making f surjective. The basic result he
21.
by ndriscoll 9d ago
That's basically saying you'll just take all functions to be surjective though, and it's stronger than you really need; the non-surjective case works fine for non-empty A. You could of course interpret some of these basic the
22.
by ndriscoll 9d ago
No, empty A is critical to the counterexample. In your example, g(x) = 1 is a left inverse. The point is you either send an element of the codomain to its (unique by injectivity) preimage if it's in the image, or to an arbitrary elemen
23.
by ndriscoll 9d ago
I ran into this same thing formalizing some of my old notes in Lean a few days ago. The tricky thing I suppose is that 0. Injectivity and A non-empty or B empty implies left invertibility, 1. Left invertibility implies injectivity. 2. Surje
24.
by ndriscoll 9d ago
That sentence just says why we're making a national government (i.e. giving up some of our rights). It does not create some unlimited requirement for governments (especially state) to do whatever they can to promote general welfare, wh
25.
by ndriscoll 9d ago
No, I quite strongly believe it actually. I likewise find it hard to believe you're serious, so I'll raise my question again: if not even a municipal library (which, I'll remind you, aren't even open the majority of the
26.
by ndriscoll 9d ago
If it's only a few minutes, you could just as well fix it at the start of the day. And if it's not, oh well? People can still read books. The librarian can still help them to find a book. If they want to manually track until the c
27.
by ndriscoll 9d ago
> nothing gives you the right to use the software in ways that violate the EULA Correct, that right is innate. > your right to create an archival copy does not extend to a right to run the media on unsupported/licensed hardware &
28.
by ndriscoll 9d ago
They can use an online service in the middle of the night, but as a citizen, I'd be upset if I learned my public library were paging someone in the middle of the night if it weren't working. That's incredibly inappropriate. I
29.
by ndriscoll 9d ago
High traffic doesn't mean high urgency. New York Public Library is huge and looks to have even more restrictive hours than mine. They're closed on Sundays! People donate because they believe in the mission, and most of the money p
30.
by ndriscoll 9d ago
My local library isn't open at 6am either (opens at 9, or 10 on Sat and 1 on Sun), and closes before 7 on Fri-Sun. > someone needs to Do they though? Why is there some assumed urgency? What happens if they don't do it "whe

More ›