matco11

I get excited at the idea of a world in which advanced mathematical problems (and their solutions) become much more accessible to a much greater number of people. As a result, making mathematics much more loved at a societal level.

Imagine a world where these most complex mathematical problems are not accessible to a few hundred people, but a few hundred thousands people. ...Those original few hundred gifted mathematicians would have an even more prominent role, and their names and achievements would be known by orders of magnitude more people that they are now.

I have noticed this degradation of 5.5 reliability to what, in my experience, I consider Claude-level of reliability since early June.

My journey dealing with this has been transitioning from 5.5 high to 5.5 xhigh to 5.4 high.

5.4 high has been perfectly reliable for me for the last 3 weeks, and I am happy there.

Occasionally, I run some tasks on 5.5 xhigh to check if it has gone back to being 100% perfectly reliable, but, at this point, I am assuming they are just counting on releasing 5.6 rather than dealing with this reliability issue.

It is somewhat different: in your example, it’s just a matter of the taxation rate.

In Norway, it seems they were taxing paper gains: as an entrepreneur you take all the risk and put the effort to make your company succeed, maybe work with the smallest salary you can, so as to help your company grow more… then they come and say: “well on paper, if hypothetically you were to sell your company now, it would be worth X, so we are going to tax you on that.” …now to pay taxes you have to sell a chunk of your company, or find other ways to fund your tax bill, which is probably going to take away resources from growing your company, which probably means your company’s will grow less and hire less…

I love basketball, soccer, and tennis… but you guys have no idea how powerful I have found to share stories like this with my young kids.

Yes, I want them to excel in sports, but these articles provide a crucial counterweight to the all-too-common narrative that becoming a pro athlete is the ultimate dream. Instead, these stories show that being exceptional in STEM isn’t just something you do because you are curious, you find it interesting, you enjoy it (all great motivators), or to please parents and teachers (generally, probably, lesser quality motivators): these stories show that being exceptional in STEM can open doors to exciting, high-impact careers.

It’s been amazing to watch my kids begin to reframe STEM not as the “sensible” thing to do, but as something genuinely cool, aspirational, and full of opportunity.

> remember how they mentioned they built multiple Codex prototypes, it must've sucked to see some other people's version chosen instead of your own

Well it depends on people’s mindset. It’s like doing a hackathon and not winning. Most people still leave inspired by what they have seen other people building, and can’t wait to do it again.

…but of course not everybody likes to go to hackathons

Brilliant. Thank you for the precise reference.

Can you guys explain what this would be bad for the OpenAI and Anthropic of the world?

Wasn't the story always outlined to be we build better and better models, then we eventually get to AGI, AGI works on building better and better models even faster, and we eventually get to super AGI, which can work on building better and better models even faster... Isn't "super-optimization"(in the widest sense) what we expect to happen in the long run?