justanotherjoe

Nerds were so good they made themselves obsolete

This is like saying WW2 didnt happen while you were living in a Soviet village in 1940s, and you were doing the same thing, and nothing seemed to change

That's sort of how problems work.

Then ignore them? I dont get these types of mysteries. It's easy enough to find math majors these days to ask them their opinions on things. There're so many of them. You most likely know some from your highschool. They'd probably say the same things though, or even freak out harder.

While it takes a good math person to make breakthroughs it's much easier to find someone who has a feel of whats important/hard and not. Even a mediocre math major/master is far more authoritative than an expert at adjacent fields (CS,physics). Or to listen to webdevs 'ai skeptics' or whatever on the internet.

I generally dont mind if someone is angry at me, if it's something I did poorly. Honestly i enjoy it, shows someone cares abt what i output. However, when people expect to be wronged , and preemptively adopt an agressive posture, before i get a chance to do anything, that's where my desire to cooperate plummets.

How i reason about this is that, there are two types of science works, exploitative and generative. Exploitative science is kinda like what ingen do in jurassic park, finding an use case based on available tensions in the literature.

Funnily enough, 'generative' ai is not good at generative science, of which requires unique human perception that is not purely symbollic manipulation, but requires a form of revelation. That I think is not here yet with ai...

I think it's more than that. I made prediction in earlier 2024 that the main players of AI will stick with transformers while second class players will want to transcend it. The difference is admittedly a bit subtle but ai researchers would get it. I wrote it with mamba in mind back then, but google was still trying to come up with the 'next transformers' and one that can remember using weights and all that stuffs. You can say the same abt lecun's and ilya's now.

My main reasoning was that transformers was the lightning in a bottle and the best work is in extending it instead of transcending it, which requires you to capture another lightning . Which to me appears to miss the assignment. OpenAI, Antrophic, they understand this intimately. Google on the other hand, fell victim to their own ambition.

Probably they wouldn't be. A lot of this is people catastrophizing. Probably already somewhat unhappy even before.

Regarding spirituality i think it's more about math itself than math as a discipline. Math might be divine. Even if math is divine, i think doing math doesnt make you more spiritual.

This kind of thinking assumes quantitative changes never result in qualitative change. Which is demonstrably false. Obviously there are thresholds where phase transitions happen.

Take saltwatwer and cell. After some threshold of saltiness is passed, the water flow reverses from into the cell to away from the cell. And the cell frikkin dies.

You tested it, i doubt you authored it. A paternal twin can have one with good impulse control and another who's more instinctual. Even in the same family and upbringing.

I'm reminded of a kid, and there is always such a kid, whose parents put them in front of everyone and asked them, 'what do you want to be when you grow up?'. And when they answered, 'i want to be a president!' Everyone cheered and clapped and remarked how cute they were.

The kid's lying of course, he just said what he knew they wanted to hear. He didn't mean any of it. But i find this disgusting, especially because it's pervasive basically with everyone, me, you probably, in the age of social media, just a little more sophisticated.

Louis CK, in a different way, said that you shouldn't do that. If your bit is 'i want to be a president' then all your thoughts should be of how you want to be a president, not of cheers or of bombing the bit.

Most people don't mean what they say. That's why they don't feel compelling. And it's so sickening to us, that we flee to the media, actors, politicians, who seem to say things, say things they mean. The ultimate irony is that ofc they do, they are performing. They dont mean it either.

So I guess, realize it's all performance. And try to mean what you say.

what's stopping someone to feed it to an llm and say 'make it simpler' and maybe run it twice.

Yeah mathematicians tend to do that. Physicists not so much I think. However, none of what he says about AI is such a strong prediction, unlike the 'crackpots' that are probably on your mind.