QuesnayJr

I think they're imitating Eliza.

I never even understood what the theory was supposed to be for why it would lower interest rates.

You can only run a trade deficit if the country you are trading with is a net investor. Part of that investment is going to be in the form of bonds. If you force a cut in the trade deficit, you cut the demand for bonds, which lowers their price and raises their interest rate.

The joke the previous comment is making is that Borges already wrote that story. "Pierre Menard, the Author of the Quixote."

That's a different article. The Gizmodo article has a byline of "Melissa" and apparently is originally from TodayIFoundOut.com.

Neither do I. Right after I read your reply I knew I had made a mistake engaging with you.

I did think you meant it literally. Since I can't replicate the question you asked, I have no way of verifying your claim.

I tried this just now on Chatbot Arena, and both chatbots asked for more information.

One was GPT 4.5 preview, and one was cohort-chowder (which is someone's idea of a cute code name, I assume).

The law would literally allow an EU entity to own it, or a Brazilian entity, or a South African entity.

I think there is something to this idea. There have been cases where person A was working on proving a result but struggled, then person B announced a proof of the result, and then person A was inspired to finish their proof. (Sadly, I don't remember the specifics.)

I think mathematicians want something more basic, though elegance and simplicity are appreciated. They want to know why something is true, in a way that they can understand. People will write new proof of existing results if they think they get at the "why" better, or even collect multiple proofs of the same result if they each get at the "why" in different ways.

Other people have spent a lot of time on it and gotten nowhere, so I suspect there is some art to it.

The title alone is a horror story in two sentences.

They thought it because we have an existence proof: gpt-3.5-turbo-instruct can play chess at a decent level.

That was the point of the post (though you have to read it to the end to see this). That one model can play chess pretty well, while the free models and OpenAI's later models can't. That's weird.

You can get some higher degree examples (y squared = a degree 4 polynomial, for example), but degree 3 is special. An arbitrary polynomial of degree 4 and higher lack a rich structure (as far as we can tell). You can try to get around it by embedding the curve in a higher dimensional object, but it doesn't get you as far. (This is the idea behind hyperelliptic curve cryptography, for example.)

Just to be clear, an ellipse is a quadratic curve. Ellipses are not elliptic curves. (They are still curves, though, as long as you restrict to plugging in real numbers, not complex.) The terminology is unfortunate.

I just tried it and got "Liora" instead of "Elara".

An interesting example of someone who managed to produce two unrelated "sleeping beauties" in different fields is the German mathematician Grete Hermann. Her Ph.D. thesis in the 20s gave effective algorithms for many questions in abstract algebra. I think her motivation was philosophical, that an effective algorithm is better than an abstract existence result, but it wasn't considered that interesting of a question until computers were invented and computer algebra developed, and then immediately several of her algorithms became the state-of-the-art at the time.

Unrelatedly, she wrote on the foundations of quantum mechanics, and showed that a "theorem" of John von Neumann, which would have ruled out later research by Bohm and Bell if it were correct, was false three years after he published it. Bohm and Bell had to independently rediscover that the result was false years later.

Because either the person quoted or the article itself wants to highlight an apparent contradiction between making a wargame and writing the novel. If the point is that war is meaningless, then maybe there's a contradiction, but if the point is that everything is meaningless, then there isn't any more of a contradiction than eating breakfast is a contradiction.

All of human history is manipulated by the Tralfamadorians to get a single piece of metal to Titan to repair the Tralfamadorian spaceship. The army officers, you, me, everybody, we are all the result of Tralfamadore's plan.

It's a long time since I read the book, but it strikes me as a bizarre misreading. The article quotes the guy who discovered the game as saying:

> In Sirens of Titan, there’s this army of Mars which is really a joke. No one in the army, [not] even the officers, are really in charge of what’s going on. They’re all mind controlled. Nobody has any real free will. They’re just set up as a pawn to be sacrificed, to make Earth come together, kind of Watchmen-style.

The effort of the officers in the book is meaningless, but it turns out the effort of all humanity for all of history is completely meaningless, because humanity is being manipulated by aliens to achieve a trivial purpose.

I think if you are fascinated by primes and look at lists of primes, you would eventually notice that twin primes keep happening, but they get further and further apart. The first time someone published the conjecture that there are infinitely many is Polignac in 1849, but I'm sure someone wondered before.

If you are fascinated by primes, then you just want to know the answer, independent of any application.

There has been considerable progress since Sutton wrote. The latest models don't even need convolutions and certain kinds of invariances. Visual Transformer models don't even necessarily know which pixels are near each other. They figure it out through correlations.

I was skeptical of the statistical approach myself, but I think it's time for some humility in the face of its wild success.

After reading that Torment Nexus post you didn't have the urge to name an AI product Torment Nexus? Really?

It was Erik Naggum replying to Xah Lee, so you had two of the most abrasive and unpleasant people in the lisp community interacting.

I read some subreddits for authors for a while, and all of the advice was like this. A few authors get lucky writing what they like, but most of them find a niche and relentlessly optimize for it. Romance sounded like the most optimizable, because it's a bunch of microgenres, and within a microgenre the readers want to read the exact same thing over and over. Some authors were making good money writing a book a month and self-publishing.

At that point, I'd rather be an accountant.

It telegraphs very strongly that it's not meant to be taken seriously. The main character's name is Hiro Protagonist, for example.

I never really understood precisely what the challenges around dates were until this comment and the previous one.

That's a great article. I've seen those same McKuen books in used-book stores, and never knew what the story was. But now I know.

I have seen sus-column-r on LMSYS a bunch of times. It seemed pretty good, though not as good as the best Google, Anthropic, or OpenAI models.

I'm surprised they managed to catch up. I guess there really is no moat.

I think this is the key point, one that gets neglected in these discussions. It's easy to say we should reward people for doing a good job, and punish people for doing a bad job, but that determination will be made by people, and those people can have an agenda. Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?