subsistence234

in the sense that both are about uncomfortable truths, things we don't want to be true but are true anyway.

most people care more about their social standing than about truth, so they just lie (including to themselves), no biggie.

the "AI alignment" people are for example far more open to granting personhood to sufficiently advanced AI systems than are AI risk denialists. it's not hate of AI that drives the alignment discourse, it's a deeper understanding of our shared reality.

for simpler minds, understanding the risks posed by a superhuman AI is akin to hate, and understanding the degrees of inheritability of various traits is akin to discrimination. simpler minds need the lies in order to not hate, need the lies in order to not discriminate.

optimistic in comparison to the alternative, where humans can't understand anything anymore.

if a particularly intelligent sixth grader was highly motivated to understand chromatic homotopy and had a highly capable private teacher available to her 24/7, she might within a year get to the point where she could apply it by herself to figure out some simple but nontrivial topological properties. (nobody has tested this. maybe it would require at least three years instead of one.)

if a particularly intelligent chimpanzee was for some reason highly motivated to understand chromatic homotopy, no matter how many years the most incredible teachers spent explaining it to her, she would never comprehend anything about it.

that's the pessimistic scenario: humans will be to future AI like our closest evolutionary relatives are to us. or even more pessimistic: we will be to future AI like insects are to us.

>hmm let's see... important applications of math... i guess there's matrix multiplication and fourier transform. anything else? probably not.

t. low information voter.

Post the actual articles that you have in mind. What I've seen is vague slop.

A good example is https://richardaragon.substack.com/p/a-universal-prime-funct... describing a supposed "universal prime function" which is simply a finite approximation using a sum of 50 sines (each applied to a linear term plus a sine-log offset). The 53 parameters are fitted to the first 10^3 or so prime numbers. This is followed by the *absolutely ridiculous* claim that if the function approximates the first 10^3 primes well, it must also fit the remaining prime numbers (of which there are infinitely more than 10^3000000000) equally well.

Then they suggest "A formal proof connecting this function to the RH would involve the following steps" using this great discovery: "1. Correspondence with the Explicit Formula: Demonstrate that the oscillatory correction term in our function corresponds to the sum over zeta zeros in the explicit formula for ψ(x) or π(x). 2. Error Bound: Prove that the error in the prime counting function derived from our function is bounded by O(√x log x). 3. Contradiction: Show that if any non-trivial zero were to lie off the critical line ℜ(s) = 1/2, the error would exceed the bound, leading to a contradiction."

This isn't even midwit math.

It's the kind of naive ideas I had as a high schooler, who was good at high school math and who knew how to code functions and plots in Mathematica, but who had no understanding of higher math. This kind of naive approach to RH signals that one doesn't even understand the problem.

does niche coding cause men to transition? does autism cause men to become niche coders and transition? does porn addiction cause autistic male niche coders to transition? does niche coding cause autism, and that combined with porn addiction cause a gender crisis? nobody knows. this would be extremely interesting research.

LLMS aren't the only thing that has changed over time in the way texts are written.

if they used older texts as training data, to some extent pangram would just be an age classifier for writing style.

The supposed "magicality" of human consciousness is hard to reconcile with evolution -- where on that long path from amoeba to homo sapiens did God (PBUH) implant our connections to the soul realm?

Even evolution-deniers run into difficult-to-justify self-contradictions when trying to explain how the supposed supernatural part of our consciousness is both affecting the natural world and affected by the natural world, but not part of it.

NP doesn't mean "we don't know a polynomial time algorithm for it", it means "a proposed answer can be verified as correct in polynomial time"

"AI solved another conjecture" is exciting for a lot of people who have otherwise no interest in math. So the fact that it goes viral may have very little connection to the mathematical importance of the result.

> all Romani and Muslims

Not at all. Only the ones that (1) cause constant stress, squalor or random violence, and also (2) aren't citizens of the country. The standards and expectations for immigrants should be higher than the standards for natives, not lower.

Immigration into a country should only happen as far as the native population consents to it, whether that existing population in question is muslim or romani or swedish.

Maybe you only want non-white peoples to a have a right to self-determination? I want every people to have that right. I wouldn't dream of forcing the people of Bhutan to accept against their will an unlimited number of Swedish problem immigrants. The natives of Bhutan have a right to decide for themselves how much immigration, and what kind of immigration they want.

Destroying the public space this way results in only the rich being able to escape the constant stress, squalor, random violence. For some reason that's "progressive."

If you believe that even the non-rich, of all ethnicities, should have access to peace, beauty, and safety: you're a "white supremacist!"

yes, your plan would require extreme levels of oppression. it's a non-starter in anything remotely resembling a democracy. and if implemented, the outcome would still not be what you expect.

houses get more expensive due to changes in scarcity, i.e. the number of people who want to buy houses (and can afford to) in an area increasing faster than the number of people who want to sell houses there.

the main lever a government has, is to make new construction easier and cheaper -- that increases the supply. commies don't seem to like that, often because they're NIMBYs, but also because new construction tends to be in the high end segment. commies don't seem to understand that people who move into newly built high end housing do so by moving out of existing, on average slightly less high end housing, which then becomes free, and so on... all the way down to the lowest end housing. increasing supply at the highest end increases housing supply in all segments, though with increasing delay.

an option that doesn't help much with existing scarcity, but with future changes in scarcity, would be a recurring land tax (proportional to the local value of owned land). in order to be democratically feasible this would have to be introduced very gradually (over the course of 30+ years) and combined with tax decreases elsewhere.

the article isn't saying you should be scared of chinese models

aside from the huge domestic market (or potential in the future), china has built incredibly efficient infrastructure for manufacturing prototyping/production.

but it's also thanks to protectionism, and their strictly controlled (not freely traded) cheap currency.

if china had to play by the same rules as japan or germany it would not be quite as successful. but the west walked into this trap, hoping their win-win proposal would be satisfactory for all. now the west is too dependent on chinese production to enforce equal standing.

of course the US has its own unfair advantages, e.g. the global reserve currency and the massive post-WWII headstart.

a stranger is asking you to risk $100k on his half-baked plan in exchange for nothing, and you say "sure go ahead take my money!"? no. it doesn't work like that in the islamic world.

as a borrower who's not allowed to compensate for your lenders' risk monetarily, your access to loans is severely restricted. Essentially you have to rely on your extended family. and instead of paying for the risk with interest payments, you have to pay with loyalty and subservience.

it restricts social mobility far more than the western model. it incentivizes clan structures. which incentivize cousin marriage.

power concentrates in the patriarchs of a million little family kingdoms. which causes all kinds of economic inefficiencies.

in the US, even if you're born without any family connections, as a healthy 20 year old you can find a job (hard work) that allows you to save $70k per year and invest it. when you're 30 you have $1M and a good credit history, you can easily leverage that to get a $2M loan at low interest rates, which allows you to start any kind of productive venture you want.

and you can do all this without owing your clan's patriarch access to e.g. your most profitable clients, or your daughters hand in marriage to his retarded son, or anything else he wants in exchange for his generosity.

The regime spent the past 50 years teaching everyone that their nation is just a source of shame and at best just a meaningless social construct, and that their culture and people's history is trash, that really nothing about it is worth saving.

And now the regime wants them to voluntarily sacrifice their lives for it.

Really exposes the current state of journalism in Germany and more broadly Europe: just propaganda and gossip.

A functioning "fourth estate" would have reported on this *before* the law was passed.

> This isn't X \emdash it's Y!

On top of analyzing vast amounts of surveillance data, AI also has to write HN comments defending the mass surveillance! Busy life.

it's crypto-fascist misogynoir!

yeah it may not be helpful, but at least it's starting a conversation. most people aren't even aware yet, and there's no way to raise awareness without a vacation. for example none of our web designers knows how to put a message on the website without shutting it down. and none of our managers knows how to shut down a website without taking a vacation.

sounds like it's a religious ceremony to you. the purpose of the strike is to increase pressure on the government, you're demanding actions that decrease that pressure, apparently for piety reasons.

you're at least 10 years too late with that idea

what do you think changed culturally around 2014 (I'd say it started a little earlier, maybe 2011)?

Because the German law only harms Germans, whereas the Italian law in question demands global bans.

what in the marvel slop redditor fantasy is this?

There's no accountability or due process. According to this brilliant law, if some crony with write-privilege adds your website to a list, the whole world has to ban your website within 30 minutes no questions asked.

Really?

A group of people who were elected by nobody, should, without any accountability or due process, be able to ban any website they don't like from the internet? And not just for Italians but globally?

Even if you think this is a great thing for Italians (I have no idea why anyone would think that), you expect the whole world to surrender to this absurd demand? Categorical imperative???

where is the mythical land of people that prefer gamey metallic beef?

> he is accused of targeted harassment

yeah but that's an accusation without basis in reality.

Is there really a dearth of maintainers for the originals? They already work fine, no? To me it sounds a bit like: "Addition has become stagnant, so we need to re-implement it in higher category theory. Sure, 99% of even research mathematicians don't benefit from that re-implementation. But no risk no reward! If vocal traditionalists refuse to contribute to reinventing the wheel, maybe they're working on something that hasn't been refined/stagnated decades ago, but I won't take their perspective (that addition already works fine) seriously, unless they start re-implementing addition as well."