JohnKemeny

Almost everyone who has interacted with a blockchain ended up losing money.

There's even a HN post from almost exactly 5 years ago:

Computer Vision: Algorithms and Applications, 2nd ed (szeliski.org)

0 comments

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24945823

But anyway; why not? Yes, add (2020) to the title, by all means.

Regarding the Cycle Removal Problem. This problem is actually called Feedback Arc Set (it is a set that "hits" all "feedbacks" (i.e. cycles) with arcs, i.e., edges). Its undirected variant is called Feedback Edge Set and is actually simply Minimum Spanning Tree, i.e., a problem solvable in O(m log n) time, compared to the NP-completeness for the directed case.

While the cycle removal algorithm is a fine heuristic, it can perform arbitrarily bad.

Do you also think that IBM Watson won Jeopardy primarily because of its ability to reason?

Or due to its massive internal database combined with superhuman button pressing skills?

> ICPC = The International Collegiate Programming Contest. These are college level programmers, not elite competitive programmers.

ICPC finalists are very much in the world elite of competitive programmers.

I think Java is dying.

If you want to teach algorithmic thinking, teach Python.

If you want to teach hardware and low-level systems, teach C.

What makes you say that they are easier? Are there more people who manages to solve a problem from ICPC than from IOI?

How do you compare those?

There were at least 2 very simple problems in IOI this year.

I haven't read the ICPC problem set, and perhaps there are some low-hanging fruits, but I highly doubt it.

I prefer not to due to privacy concerns. Perhaps you can try yourself?

I will say that after checking, I see that the model is set to "Auto", and as mentioned, used almost 8 minutes. The prompt I used was:

    Solve the following problem from a competitive programming contest. Output only the exact code needed to get it to pass on the submission server.

It did a lot of thinking, including

   I need to tackle a problem where no web-based help is available. The task involves checking if a given tree can be the result of inserting numbers 1 to n into an empty skew heap, following the described insertion algorithm. I have to figure out the minimal and maximal permutations that produce such a tree.

And I can see that it visited 13 webpages, including icpc, codeforces, geeksforgeeks, github, tehrantimes, arxiv, facebook, stackoverflow, etc.

There is a clear difference between what OpenAI manages to do with GPT-5 and what I manage to do with GPT-5. The other day I asked for code to generate a linear regression and it gave back a figure of some points and a line through it.

If GPT-5, as claimed, is able to solve all problems in ICPC, please give the instructions on how I can reproduce it.

I went to ICPC's web pages, downloaded the first problem (problem A) and gave it to GPT-5, asking it for code to solve it (stating it was a problem from a recent competitive programming contest).

It thought for 7m 53s and gave as reply

    # placeholder
    # (No solution provided)

What do you mean by creation.

I'm a mathematician and my "creations" are small notes, comments, and very simple figures.

I've never (besides flipping pages) experienced any noticable lag or delay.

I travel a lot and bring it on the plane. It has thousands of pages of handwritten notes, and hundreds of text books and papers.

In the airport or on the plane, I download papers I want to read or have to review.

On touchdown, my reviews are synced and I can send the annotated paper by email.

It does a bit more than a literal notepad.

> "Even Apple"

Literally the company of all time with most money

Could it be caused by dry skin?

Look at their actual papers before making a comment of what is or isn't their core field: https://dblp.org/pid/35/3081.html

They are physicists and will therefore talk about things that make sense to them. What they aren't: computational linguists and deep learning experts.

I asked ChatGPT and it agrees with the statement that it is indeed wild

Turing, Church, and even Knuth got their degrees before CS was an academic discipline. At least I don't think Turing studied Turing machines in his undergrads.

I'm saying that lots of people like to post their opinions of LLMs regardless of whether or not they actually have any competence in either computational linguistics or deep learning.

As you note, some physicists do have computing backgrounds. I'm not suggesting they can't do computer science.

But today, most people hold opinions about LLMs, both as to their limits and their potential, without any real knowledge of computational linguistics nor of deep learning.

He's a chemist. Lots of chemists and physicists like to talk about computation without having any background in it.

I'm not saying anything about the content, merely making a remark.

But then the claim is meaningless.

> The audience cannot care about your work until they understand the ‘value proposition’, to use still more contemporary capitalist jargon.

Hard disagree.

It is easy to imagine a problem that just sounds FUN.

> Every talk must begin with its motivation

Must is a strong word. Surely there exist good presentations that begin with something else.

Agreed. Pandoc with some webpage template (bootstrap).

Is Dropbox still in use, though?

Not so much outdated as simply not filled in. This is a submitted pdf, not proofed pdf. You can see that both volume and page numbers are missing.

These are things filled in by the journal in the proofing stage (after peer review).

I think, in fact, for every prime number p at least 5, 4 mod p is (congruent to) 4.

Indeed, the situation reminds me of those people on reddit who invite 20 people to a party and are surprised when nobody shows.

Of course there is supposed to be competition when applying to positions, but you should have a good idea of your chances of getting a job before investing/wasting your (and their) time.

These are very bad advice, and it's clear why you needed to send 450 applications.

I've only once applied to a job I didn't get, and I've had more than 10 jobs.

It's called networking.

Here is one advice to rule them all:

Talk to people and build a network for yourself.