tphyahoo2

"To come back to the point of why agents can’t (really) deal with the slop themselves, we need to look at the evaluation of SlopCodeBench. In contrast to other coding benchmarks, which give the agent a complete list of instructions at the start and then have a set of hidden tests the program needs to pass, they do the opposite. They create multiple rounds of instruction and test iterations, where in between checkpoints the context of the models is erased. Thereby mimicking much more closely an iterative process, like how coding agents are actually used by humans. The result of that is that bad coding decisions accumulate over time and for the strict solve rate, where all tests have to be passed at all checkpoints, even state of the art models achieve 0% pass rate"

I like how this captures with a metric (lines of code and cyclomatic complexity, some other basically tractable measures) in an automated way, something we all by now intuitively know.

google: god is silence saramago quote

seems to work ok

LMMV: llm, so your mileage may vary.

"In constructive mathematics, proof by contradiction, while not universally rejected, is treated with caution and often replaced with direct or constructive proofs."

  (gemini llm answer to google query: constructive math contradiction)

"Wiles proved the modularity theorem for semistable elliptic curves, from which Fermat’s last theorem follows using proof by contradiction."

  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wiles%27s_proof_of_Fermat%27s_Last_Theorem

So, will the Lean formalization of FLT involve translation to a direct or constructive proof? It seems not, I gather the proof will rely on classical not constructive logic.

"3. Proof by Contradiction: The core of the formal proof involves assuming ¬Fermat_Last_Theorem and deriving a contradiction. This contradiction usually arises from building a mathematical structure (like an elliptic curve) based on the assumed solution and then demonstrating that this structure must possess contradictory properties, violating established theorems. 4. Formalizing Contradiction: The contradiction is formalized in Lean by deriving two conflicting statements, often denoted as Q and ¬Q, within the context of the assumed ¬Fermat_Last_Theorem. Since Lean adheres to classical logic, the existence of these conflicting statements implies that the initial assumption (¬Fermat_Last_Theorem) must be false."

(gemini llm answer to google query: Lean formalization of fermat's last theorem "proof by contradiction")

Furious words and threats won't stop bitcoin.

Neither will bans and prohibitions, unless you are willing to go full north korea with cameras everywhere and computers locked down. And you'll probably fail with that.

You're beating your fists against an ocean.

Touch some grass.

I'm sure the kidnapper could help you with that.

Curent ransomware helpfully tells you where to buy bitcoin.

Btw as a bitcoin maxi, this doesn't make me happy.

"Without bitcoin, you collect the ransom in gold with a dead drop."

maybe you missed the bit about gold.

I agree, and this is a reason I am glad bitcoin exists.

My point is that there is nothing stopping bitcoin from being used in a paper cash like way, any more than any other value carrying token.

Bitcoin without government support? Possible, but inconvenient and dangerous. Bitcoin with government support? More nice things.

Currently we are in the "with government support" world, more or less. I hope this continues.