ak_111

Is there really a moral panic? Apart from a few viral Twitter posts, I don't see a major sobriety push by my colleagues.

Profits of main alcohol suppliers has certainly taken a hit over the last 5 years but this is arguably far more because of rise of remote working, inflation (drinking at pubs have become much more costly than before) and people in general just addicted to their phone rather than going out (similar to the impact on almost all social activities no just going to pubs)

Not an expert, but as I understand from my colleagues you can make a case for lots of really important problems related to protein folding to be included in the list. As protein folding hasn't been nearly "solved" by alphafold as has been reported in many places.

Devil's advocate: OpenAI not being able to use compute is highly correlated to many other AI companies not being able to find a meaningful use of this compute.

Failure to take into consideration those kind of correlations ("If my biggest client isn't able to buy it, I would be able to find someone else who will") is one of the principle causes why many risk models turned out to be garbage during the Great Financial Crisis.

Do you realise that the only reason the average US taxpayer keeps getting wrecked into one pointless forever war after the other no matter who is in power is because the elites are never held accountable for their mad self-enriching adventures?

Holding people like Hegseth (who literally insider traded defense equities right before the start of the war) and Trump accountable (who practically made a gazillion insider trading each mad meme he posted while the world burnt) is not "dividing people into teams"

This war started as a regime change operation in Iran, one of the shakiest regimes in the world pre-war, but ironically the war might end up with most of the nations who supported the war (either vocally or quietly) "regime changed" (loosely defined), including Israel, US, some European countries and now possibly some Gulf nations, awhile the Iranian regime seem to have tightened its grip more than ever.

Yet MAGA supporters were saying early in the war that they are "plan trusters" as prior US admins sucked at regime change because it is a "skills issue" and none of the prior admins had the triple digits IQ of Hegseth, Trump and Bessent.

Is it possible that they claim they used a "new internal model" to provide an excuse for "training" on new user data, knowing full well this new user data will include Buckmaster's chat?

So the entire "new internal model" is 'parallel construction' in criminology speak to justify spying on Buckmaster's work in a legal way.

This is indeed a good concise description of how to connect the two, but even making peace with this, there is something still magical in how the permutations in the sum cancel neatly (in an inclusion-exclusion kind of a way) to get the volume.

But if you see the geometric view then the permutation sum, for certain obsessive learners they want to see why they are equivalent and thats the hard part.

Determinants are easy to use but very hardly to grasp intuitively, this is not a minority point of view. See countless of StackOverflow questions begging for a conceptual exposition of determinants.

The easiest conceptual handle is geometric: volume expansion, but seeing how this is related to the combinatorial sum over all permutations, or how those two point of views are related to the algebraic one (that a set of equations having a solution or not), is not easy to see even in the 2D case.

I won't be surprised if math professors don't have this issue like you said (especially if someone is comfortable with wedge products), but the vast majority of newcomers who are interested in understanding why something works rather than just how to use it struggle all the time with determinants.

ah i thought so, interesting. I think the challenge is to do 2 while still keeping it realistic, which actually gets very close to synthetic data generation.

if the data is not synthetic, how do you ensure that the LLM hasn't learnt about this data for example from training on the Financial Times.

This is not new, most famous conjectures are believed to be true mainly because an already enormous brute force search was conducted finding no counter-example.

lol honest this wasn’t AI, I guess I need to work on my style

Hmm this sounds like an incumbent missing a paradigm shift because they didn't want it to disrupt their core (usually enterprise) business, although riding the shift would have ultimately delivered an order magnitude larger business.

Classical example is Microsoft actively undermining mobile because it threatened selling Windows or enterprise licenses.

Or Yahoo fighting Google's model because the latter model's didn't depend on taking enterprise deals to rank results.