quantumspandex

Science doesn't have to be a grind with AI.

No one "forces" anyone to verify it.

This reprioritization of math would release a tremendous amount of human capital to do other more productive things other than posing yet another abstract puzzle which may or may not have an use in a few hundred years. It's not even clear if the human race can survive until then nor is it justified to spend that resource researching that far ahead instead of just when we need it.

Yeah but we are not talking about what should be studied, but rather what should be funded

Let's just wait until the truth comes out to see how smug you were

How about not trying to be always on the cutting edge ? Is mathematics a sport ?

We don't train current LLMs to mimic the average human's writing style. We train it to be smart, helpful, and knowledgable, too knowledgeable for a human. We can easily train a LLM to pass the Turing test if we wanted to, but then it would just sound dumb or biased.

Stable environment for new hardware where everything works out of the box.

Computation on human brain is on a totally different substrate than silicon. It's in memory and highly error prone.

It's questionable a mere algorithm would get us there without a fundamental change in computer architecture. (in terms of Intelligence / W)

Security is another problem, and should be tackled systematically. Artificially making dependency inclusion hard is not it and is detrimental to the more casual use cases.

Watching on a movie on a 10 hour flight while not having to sit in awkward position for charging is one use case.

When you go travelling and do not want to carry around a backpack, and 1 day of heavy video recording, watching youtube on train plus 1 year of lithium battery degradation. That's when I want larger battery.

So we are paying 99% of the performance just for the 1% of cases where it's nice to code in.

Why do people think it's a good trade-off?

Law should be considered to be artificial rules optimized for the collective good of society.

What's the worst that can happen if we allow unregulated AI training on existing music? Musician as a job won't exist anymore lest for the greatest artists. But it makes creating music much more accessible to billions of people. Are they good music? Let the market decide. And people still make music because the creative process is enjoyable.

The animus towards AI generated music deeply stems from job security. I work in software and I see it is more likely that AI can be eventually able to replace software devs. I may lose my job if that happens. But I don't care. Find another career. Humanity needs to progress instead of stagnating for the sake of a few interest groups.

that's just your opinion.