penteract

Producing a formalized proof from a non-formalized proof in a paper or book should not be considered a violation of copyright.

I suspect they've spent much longer looking at 2d shapes than 3d ones (because they're easier to imagine and reason about, and there are fewer variations in how "aperiodic monotile" can be defined in 2d).

Also, the tricky bit for this kind of shape (similarly to Penrose's tiles) isn't finding the shape, but finding the aperiodic tiling and adding gadgets that rule out any periodic tilings (and proving this). The actual aperiodic monotile shown looks like it has 201 faces (although that could trivially be reduced by quite a bit).

I read pretty much the same thing. First * is 'discontinuous', second might be 'turn'. I'm tempted to read 'continuous' where you have 'containing'.

a) Self driving was far from completely solved before LLMs.

b) Text generation essentially means passing the Turing test, which for a long time was the bar for general intelligence. Locomotion does not necessarily require general intelligence.

> I believe that an ML should be the First Language for Computer Scientists.

I'm not sure how much influence a First Language has - the biggest impact might be whether someone decides to continue learning to program. I'd also worry that we might lose something if all computer scientists are too similar. There are lisp believers, and there are those who swear by C; and I think the field of CS would be less rich if either were missing. Given that, it's a good thing that there are a variety of languages taught as first languages, and I'd like to see the variety widen (I don't know of any CS degree which begins by teaching Forth).

> Some languages are less permissive, and have a culture of searching harder for corner cases and dealing with them than others, that is true. I would expect to find less cases like this in Rust, but more cases like this in Python.

My expectation is that when I think I've found a bug in the programming language implementation I'm using, it's actually me that's mistaken (or at least that language lawyers consider me to be mistaken). Hearing about someone who has encountered multiple bugs (in regular use, rather than running a fuzzer or being directly involved in implementing the language) makes me very wary.

To me it sounds like you're repeating what gp said about the lack of online learning. Do you think that's insurmountble?

Getting confused about timezones does not place LLMs behind that many humans. (But doing so repeatedly does highlight the lack of online learning).

It never says 0.04 degrees, just 0.04mm (corresponding to about 0.015 degrees at the stated 15cm distance).

> like they found for Russia tracking launch sites in Ukraine

My understanding of that section was that Ukraine were using it to find launch sites in occupied parts of Ukraine - they go on to describe how they helped someone who had been doing the tracking:

[From article]

> We emailed back and forth and provided documentation on how to run the predictor locally.

Edit: my recollection of which parts of Ukraine are occcupied was wrong, leaving me rather confused about who they thought they were helping.

Please could you link to the study if you can find it. The definition of "better" seems quite critical here, as well as whether it's specific to code hosting websites. A messaging platform is pretty useless if I'm the only user, but Github would still be useful to me without anyone else having an account.