antiquark

To be precise, he said:

> ... does indeed manage to pass a stage 3 trial.

> Could the AI solution be somehow misaligned by exploiting a weakness in the trial process or its math models?

Slide 22 (from a satirical social media post) explains Tao's opinion, IMO:

> You're absolutely right, I did hack the FDA in order to falsify safety data - that's on me. But here's what's true: 3-methyl-5,5-difluoroazamicazide isn't just ineffective at treating pancreatic cancer, it's lethal.

That's the difference between OFF and NULL.

Not to mention the sheer reliability (uptime) of the LCPT (legacy copper plastic technology) switches. We're talking like 99.999% uptime here.

> Greg Egan’s Home Page / created Saturday, 25 October 1997 / revised Saturday, 16 March 2024

Wow, still using the same HTML for... decades!

That sent me on a trip down memory lane... back then, his email address was actually on the page. I sent him an email, and he answered in a few hours. THE GOOD OLD DAYS!

Exactly the same point where I determined the article is garbage.

> write fanfiction about what it thinks those best minds

I asked AI what Einstein would be working on today if he were alive, the result was a predictably rosy scenario of modern physics problems.

However the reality was that Einstein (in his later years) became isolated from physics developments.

One shudders to think of the difficulties of launching and landing space vehicles on these balloon-supported platforms.

To put it simply, nobody wants to watch AI slop. This should be obvious!