spawarotti

I did not say that. People can still do math even if they are completely eclipsed by AI, just as they can still play chess.

In fact, it's an interesting question: Would humans distilling ideas from AI-generated proofs help AI prove more theorems, or would AI not care at all, with no human contribution being useful in advancing its mathematical capabilities?

I think math will go the way of biology. Biologists enjoy untangling the infinitely complex mechanisms of life, including the brain, and win Nobel Prizes for discoveries like "how water enters a cell," rather than "constructing the first-ever cell capable of absorbing water."

No biologist has ever complained, "Gee whiz, it's so unfortunate that we already have a brain to study. It's all so meaningless! It would be so much better if we had to construct the first-ever brain from scratch."

I think plenty of the most intelligent people eat meat, which means they are perfectly fine with harming less intelligent species just to enjoy a tastier meal. Also, I don't think many of the most intelligent people would be particularly concerned about disturbing a few ants if they were the only obstacle to economic activity. Intellect-wise, we will be less than ants to superhuman AI.

I am still curious: when is it acceptable to hope that something is actually going to work well enough when handed over to the government?

I am still curious: when is it acceptable to hope that something is actually going to work well enough when handed over to the government?

> is never followed up with a “yes, but …” (realistic evaluation of how politics actually works).

OK, but following this logic, shouldn't we disband the government altogether and have mafias rule us all?

When is it acceptable to hope that something is actually going to work well enough when handed over to the government?

Smartness and happiness are like test coverage.

If you are not smart or have no tests, you will not be happy.

If you are smart or have high test coverage, you may or may not be happy.

There are two types of people: those who do backups, and those who will do backups.

At this point AGENTS.md is a README.md with enough hype behind it to actually motivate people to populate it with contents. People were too lazy to write docs for other people, but funnily enough are ok with doing it for robots.

This situation reminds me a bit of ergonomic handles design. Designed for a few people, preferred by everyone.

How do you deal with serializing properties "by reference"? E.g., if 3 objects reference object "Foo", then Foo is serialized once instead of being duplicated in the json 3 times?