thesmtsolver2

You can steal lemmas, rough proof directions, conceptual ideas etc without stealing the full proof.

Any of that done unattributed is plagiarism.

Either OpenAI is incompetent or evil if they can't publicly prove the allegations wrong. Or even at least state categorically they didn't train on their conversations (even without proof).

The biggest cope is buying OpenAI's "We can't prove we didn't plagiarize"

Apparently, we have AGI that can solve Millennium Prize problems but can't trace simple data flows lol.

That’s not how either logic or justice work.

What? Go ask almost anyone in Asia outside Mainland China.

They all consider China to be the aggressor because they are. E.g., Tibet or India.

Didn’t you read the memo? Only European govts or China can act in the interests of their people and companies but if the US does that it is immoral.

Just because a condition is new to you doesn’t imply moving the goalpost. People have been putting forward continual learning and similar conditions like autonomy since 1950s.

Ahem

Some Interrail travellers told to cancel passports as hacked data posted online

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2026/apr/23/some-inte...

And criminals have been caught using CCTV footage for decades.

Doesn’t matter. Details don’t matter. Look at the top comment thread: just politics and no discussion of the tech.

What about Russia and Ukraine?

This is the kind of comment that is considered informative and acceptable?

The world collectively had so much trade barriers for US goods and services and still has. They just weren’t direct like tariffs.

The party line for why the US tariffs are bad is that the US tariffs are bad for US customers and won’t hurt the US exporting countries.

Why won’t the same logic apply to Canadian tariffs?

So why leave out food industry which has provably caused health harm and killed people.

Leaving out the modern food industry but going after social media shows that this is just politics as the food industry wets the beak and greases the plan generously on both sides of the aisle.

How much of that is from legal migration from developed first world countries for both countries?

I know I will be downvoted for this.

But much much more dangerous than the US in China still.

> do, but in private.

Yeah, thanks for confirming my point.

False equivalence. Also funnily you left out Europe, why?

For instance, you can mock Trump and question the US all day.

You can’t do that in China. Even this website is banned in China.

Except

  1. Illegally occupying Tibet and cleansing the region 
  2. Occupying and cleansing several regions like Uyghur or Hong Kong
  3. Wars with neighbors like India and conflicts with all neighbors except North Korea
  4. indirectly arming Russia
  5. Taiwan 

If China had a fraction of American power, they would be making life miserable for a lot of countries.

Your comment implied that. Don’t have to say everything directly. You don’t need AI hallucination to connect things logically.

This not understanding "understanding".

> maths are internally coherent and entirely theoretical

Nope. This kind of wish-washy thinking is not what we mean by understanding.

https://iep.utm.edu/math-inc/

Sorry, but this is only partially informed.

1. The U.S. produces a massive share of global manufactured goods, ranking second globally behind China in total value added.

2. Only low skilled jobs were shipped overseas. Lower-value consumer goods like clothing and basic electronics are heavily outsourced, whereas complex machinery, aerospace equipment, chemicals, and medical devices are largely built domestically

https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/0222_ma...

During war with China, the US is not going to suffer due to lack of cheap toys or clothes from China.

This is a vacuous argument. If everything is a “probabilistic input output machine” then what exactly are you claiming?

You should look into mathematical definitions of probability. You will be surprised to find not all formal mathematical systems can fit inside probability spaces.

Banning social media for kids before banning junk food for kids when you have a childhood obesity/health crisis just shows which companies greased the hands that made the laws

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Childhood_obesity_in_Australia

That's for your safety and well-being citizen.

Sometimes less information is more information.

Usually these commenters are not from the US but get energized by US topics and misunderstand scale of things. E.g., they come from countries with a single nationalized entity for many things.

Look up when American companies got banned and when TikTok and Huawei got banned.

American companies have been banned decades earlier.

> Also are you going to simply ignore the fact that Tesla, Apple et. al. are operating just fine in China?

Also, are you and the other commenter ignoring the fact, thousands to millions of companies from China sell in the US?

Temu and Shein are still free to sell forced labor lead-infused goods. Lenovo still works. So do millions of tiny Chinese brands on Amazon.

You ignored that Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp are completely banned in China. Google Search, YouTube, Gmail, and Google Maps are completely unavailable in mainland China

TikTok wasn't banned (but had to restructure) and RedNote operates without any changes.

> Tesla, Apple et. al. are operating just fine in China

Yeah, and both companies manufacture heavily within China

Doesn’t China heavily restrict competition in its domestic markets? Probably only North Korea is worse.

China is one of the most restrictive countries but expects full access to US market behaving like a US state or territory in its claims to US domestic markets lol.

Last time I checked, China is not a US province or territory but maybe that is the state of affairs China aspires to in the long term with Trump looking to add a new state.

I think you are just agreeing with me and restating the inputs to my argument.

I didn’t say LLMs are capable of zero reasoning. An approximation is just an approximation no matter how good.

Will you bet your wealth or critical safety systems on:

1. Accuracy of standard computer arithmetic: Yes

2. Accuracy of Lean or automated theorem provers: Yes (you already do)

3. Accuracy of LLM reasoning: No

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Handbook_of_Automated_Reasonin...

This is a great resource

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Handbook_of_Automated_Reasonin...