cgio

I’m sure they could go get some insurance, it’s cost would be a good motivation

Minor benefits around clearing and settlement, but these allow for 24/7 even if the clearing house is not so. On the other hand, I don’t see how they should be able to block it. It is a derivative product, can MSFT block e.g. puts on its stock? Stock ownership gives rights, not obligations.

That’s optimistic, assuming we are still valuable as consumers.

Do you take into account the token allowance? For a heavy user this would be the equivalent of many subscriptions and they add up.

I am so sorry to hear this. I enjoyed visiting his web page July, when I came upon a couple of emails he had there, which were eye opening as they made some of the philosophical thoughts behind causal sets much clearer. A huge loss, but he did contribute amazing work.

Sorkin is great. I think causal sets make some things simpler but other more mysterious. I also found t’ Hooft’s automata and Spekkens toy illuminating in different ways.

Public benefit is the same as openness of open AI.

Let’s take it the other way around. If it is so dangerous and needs to be regulated, why is it not dangerous enough to be nationalised like an army? Even in this case, for countries with militia, such as US, why people are trusted to care a gun but would not be trusted to run a model. The fear that local models will soon be sufficient for most workloads is palpable. This is not regulatory capture for competition it is for devaluation of their product.

The nice additional reading is that you could even know what a Hilbert space is, but not what is a Hilbert space.

I am sure there are police stations in the city where this happened too.

Weird they don’t mention Bennet (1973)?

I pay taxes too. I don’t have a policeman stationed outside my home.

There was an article recently about a similar hack on fridges in American military bases I believe.

I think logic is squarely in his field, and even with simple logic, proposing the importance of second order effects on people who are dying is not tenable. Personally, knowing that he is indeed one of the smartest people around, and definitely much smarter than me, I cannot but be a bit worried that going with this example indicates traces of panic in the face of a shifting world. He’s smart but human, and maybe these weaknesses are not to bemoan but to celebrate in our current context.

Genuine question. How many big problems were solved by people who took the safe path for PhD? I would intuit there’s high correlation of unsafe PhD and big problem solvers.