zero-sharp

I'm not sure if AI use even aligns with the purpose of the university program, which is usually understanding.

Isn't that the same point piracy advocates have been making for a while? If I watch a pirated film, I didn't really consume a physical resource. Nothing physical is lost. Therefore it's not theft?

>Learning isn’t stealing.

This is cheesy. There is an exposure to (and a gain from) a resource that is traditionally associated with a cost. That cost wasn't paid. It's a public good to have information available, but it's not really acceptable to circumvent established ways of compensating the creator of the work you're benefiting from.

I think they spent millions pursuing strategies to attack that particular problem? I don't think it takes 15 million for their model to get trained on your chat logs. This is probably all automated internally. If they did scoop your ideas, it would likely get incorporated into their model without any conscious decision making. And if you're not a high profile academic, nobody will hear about it.

Moving forward, I can't imagine other mathematicians wanting to have this kind of experience. So there has to be a shift away from these services.

there's this saying... something about the ends and the means. someone help me out here

I mean, yes, there are a lot of things that are often omitted in mathematical writing and it's up to the reader to infer them (that's "mathematical maturity"). When textbooks discuss intervals, such as [a,b] for example, should the author specify the interval is nondegenerate/nonempty each time? That is, should we repeatedly see "a<b" as part of the hypothesis? Degenerate cases are often not the primary interest of the particular area or theorem you're studying. We don't usually care about functions with empty or singleton domains. And, yes, you could say a lot of results are technically false due to those degenerate/trivial cases. But usually it just means the author didn't want to clutter their writing, or it's not significant to the rest of the theory.

The post proposes a counterexample of a function with a empty domain A. Some authors do actually specify that the domain should be nonempty in this theorem. This is a common result. Others authors don't. It's not a huge deal.

yea this is something I've been wondering about. I'm not too keen on the finance aspect, but I understand that the big players aren't turning a profit. OpenAI is still losing money. I've seen some discussion related to increased token costs. If that continues, isn't dependence on their services a risk?

Yes I think so too. It wasn't CO2, but methane in the form of methane hydrate.

I remember watching a documentary which talked about feedback loops in the climate. It might have been in the context of history. If the ocean warms up enough, it causes the CO2 in the ocean itself (either in the deposits or the gas saturated in the water) to get released into the atmosphere. Maybe I'm not using the right technical words, but there is a certain amount of CO2 that sits within the ocean that is separate from the atmosphere. In any case, after a certain point it becomes a feedback loop: warmer climate -> more CO2 joins the atmosphere -> warmer climate.

>If they are truly rare, then they are likely not valuable,

Sometimes I don't even know how to respond to comments here. I don't want to be rude, but you just have to give this a moment of thought. Is all the media that you find valuable common? I know that's not the case for me based on my own experience.

I think the argument for pi should be somewhat straightforward since people usually do trigonometry in high school? I don't know an argument for e that doesn't involve some kind of calculus.

the argument for the existence of pi or e doesn't connect as easily to something as "tangible" as a polynomial equation, but the arguments are still out there

The people most involved in politics are mentally ill? Got it...

What's embarrassing about it?

>It seems to me something like history might be more at risk. In mathematics a wrong result can be checked. With something like history checking answers is not always so easy.

Isn't that exactly why we need historians? How do you fact check an interpretation of evidence or of history? I would never trust a chatbot for its take on history, and that's partly due to the fact that we've seen how political it can get. In the worst case, the communication of history can be used to misrepresent cultures and limit freedoms. How we interpret history informs our present day policies. There's no way we'll ever leave that to a computer.

>Not in a general sense, at least for standard complexity theory. It only deals with a very specific model of computation.

What is an example of a model of computation where complexity theory doesn't apply?

The parent is making a point about the rate/scale at which technology replaced workers. If you think the hypothetical is too extreme, then what would a more realistic version be? Are you uncertain about the rate of disruption?

there were two lead developers from FFMPEG on Lex Fridman's youtube channel who talked about performance gain from assembly. They claimed the opposite

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IUo0UwZOaRw

>I don't personally know anyone who writes code any more (for work). Is this not the case for you?

I hear this from time to time. But I still write code at my job. I'm not a software engineer and I don't work for a software engineering firm.

That's one interpretation: the system doesn't take of your specific needs and therefore it's neglectful or inadequate. Another interpretation is that the teacher is doing exactly what the school needs them to do because most 5 year olds aren't concerned with how air conditioners work. And perhaps it shouldn't be the responsibility of the kindergarten teacher to provide technical education?

There's a conversation to be had about the educational system underserving the intellectually curious. Trying to make that point in the context of kindergarten is a little absurd to me.

Are you asking me to believe that the educational system underserves kindergartners because the average kindergarten teacher can't provide an education on your narrow technical interest?

The responsibilities of the average kindergarten teacher probably include 1) making sure your kids don't swallow glue, and 2) making sure little johnny doesn't throw another tantrum.

>Few of my teachers really understood the things I wanted to learn, my peers weren't interested in the nerdy things I was, and my parents certainly didn't have the wealth to provide me with private tutoring.

I can understand saying that when you're in middle or high school. But as a 5 year old? This comment has to be a joke?

I have a gripe with this attitude because it goes beyond browser use. Inserting the new fancy thing everywhere is often unnecessary and affects accessibility in a negative way for a nonneglible number of your users. And that was the point of the article, right?

Taking the conversation slightly outside the original context: if I go to a restaurant, should I have a phone and an app ready so that I can order food? If I go to the gym, should I have a gym app ready so that I can sign in? I don't like having to do that. But that's just another instance of this same attitude.

I like how you equate 10 year old browser users with luddites?

Look, I don't spend most of my time online criticizing AI progress. But what does your response even mean? People hallucinating work and solutions isn't commonplace at all, right? What industry do you work in where people hallucinate with frequency?

I don't think your comment represents the situation very well. They allowed the user to upload the data and they're storing the data regardless, right?

I like this answer. For me it's not about showing others that you're correct. Instead, it's about feeling like you're being heard/acknowledged.

I'm not trying to be the "lone free thinker". But if I see a hivemind, I occasionally insert my opinion with the intention of having a different perspective be recognized.

A totally understandable situation. Most people just want to use technology to accomplish their immediate goal. I'm tech savvy and I lose my mind every time I get distracted by broken/misconfigured technology.

So I just searched my email on HIBP again. Most of the leaks I see there were from old websites I hardly cared about securing from many years ago. But, in general, how do I find out what has actually been leaked (if it's not website specific)?

I'm not going to change all of my passwords every time a random website that I used briefly ten years ago leaks my low effort password.

If I understand this correctly, it translates Rocq to C++? Took me several minutes to even understand what this is. Why is it called an extraction system? Who is this for?

I'm confused.

edit: I had to dig into the author's publication list:

https://joomy.korkutblech.com/papers/crane-rocqpl26.pdf

Testing remains a fundamental practice for building confidence in software, but it can only establish correctness over a finite set of inputs. It cannot rule out bugs across all possible executions. To obtain stronger guarantees, we turn to formal verification, and in particular to certified programming techniques that allow us to de- velop programs alongside mathematical proofs of their correctness. However, there is a significant gap between the languages used to write certified programs and those relied upon in production systems. Bridging this gap is crucial for bringing the benefits of formal verification into real-world software systems.