causalmodels

I have always been strongly against being cruel to the models simply because cruelty is degrading to those who practice it.

If this was limited to just three results, I would agree with you. But those three are just the ones I've managed to verify myself. The list of unverified results is quite a bit larger.

The field I've been investigating is not large. Even if I were to take the time and care to beat the interesting results into something meaningful, I'm afraid the pace at which I'm able to produce these results would not be well received.

Maybe I'll end up doing the write ups pseudonymously. I have taken care to make sure the results can meaningfully contribute to field but I don't want to plant flags or really receive credit of any kind. I just think they are interesting.

I like my current life and don't want to get dragged into the current fracas surrounding the use of AI in math.

The numerical results are trivial to check. I wrote the analytical results in Lean by hand before asking a former professor to confirm after asking him to keep this private.

They're valid.

What do we do about the problems that don't require many millions of dollars in resources?

Last weekend I spun up a small agent swarm and pointed it at a field of math I have some affinity towards. Within four hours I had settled three conjectures, one of which is rather famous (for the field, not in general). It cost me about four hundred dollars.

I am at a loss about what to do with these results. On one hand I feel like the mathematicians working on these should know about them, but on the other I feel a bit like a barbarian who suddenly finds themselves sacking Rome.

The formatting on the readme makes it difficult to read

The datacenter topic is cursed because people are afraid of ai. People seized on water usage because it is a more legible and tractable focus for their fear.

It is wild that amidst all these platform stability issues, GH has decided now is the time to do cutesy marketing for a new feature

When we were dating, the first thing my now wife did was get me on a regimin of sunscreen and tretinoin. I now have significantly fewer wrinkles than my younger siblings (2-3 years).

My issue with this is not that codeberg and its members want to uphold a certain set of political beliefs. Any private organization is free to do that. It's that they haven't defined the rule that's supposed to encode those beliefs.

As written, the rule is a non-exhaustive example of "content that harms codeberg's reputation". Someone asked in the pr whether "cryptocurrency-related" is defined anywhere and it merged without an answer. The responses to wording concerns was essentially they will figure it out later. Moves like this don't fill me with confidence.

> If your statistical model doesn’t contain this single bit in its output, then it doesn’t meet the minimum requirement for being a prediction.

I would be fascinated to know how you model a coin flip.

He may not have control over the podcast spots, but his PR firm does have several AI companies as clients.

After alcohol, are we going to stop people from having multiple sexual partners in their lifetime? Because if public health is the goal, that would solve a lot of problems.

It is fine to attempt to improve public health, but not at the cost of giving people a life worth living.