What about bets without insider participation, where you want the market to function as an aggregator of educated guesses? OP has one reaction to insider trading, but I imagine a very common alternative would be "those…
A lot of expressions in English started out as calques, outputs that process: you're paving the way!
All models are wrong; some are useful. Cognizance of that is even more critical for a model like exponential growth that often leads to extremely poor predictions quickly if uncritically extrapolated. I think "are the…
Students shouldn't be treating class material as something they "do not care to know." AI can be used in ways that lead to deeper understanding. If a student wants AI to give them practice problems, or essay feedback,…
I don't think there's a confident upper bound. I just don't see why it's self-evident that the upper bound is beyond anything we've ever seen in human history.
People are hurt by animals all the time: do you think having a higher IQ than a grizzly bear means you have nothing to fear from one? I certainly think it's possible to imagine that an AI that says the exactly correct…
Thanks for sharing this proof! As someone who enjoys math but never got myself through enough Galois theory to finish the standard proof, it's fantastic to see a proof that's more elementary while still giving a sense…
At that point, you'd be better off just using a recursive algorithm like the one in GMP. You're swapping out arbitrary-length for arbitrary-precision.
They then say there's an approximation for Fibonacci, which makes me think that's what they're calling Binet's formula. (I'd also expect an author with this mathematical sophistication to be aware of Binet's formula,…
I don't think it's controversial to say that asymptotic analysis has flaws: the conclusions you draw from it only hold in the limit of larger inputs, and sometims "larger" means "larger than anything you'd be able to…
It seems to me that much of recent AI progress has not changed the fundamental scaling principles underlying the tech. Reasoning models are more effective, but at the cost of more computation: it's more for more, not…
It's not that technical work is guaranteed to be in your codebase 10 years from now, it's that customers don't want to use a product that might be good six months from now. The actors in the best position to use new AI…
Previous experience isn't manual edge cases, it's training data. Humans have incredible scale (100 trillion synapses): we're incredibly good at generalizing, e.g., how to pick up objects we've never seen before or…
> The models keep getting better at an exponential. Isn't it the opposite? Marginal improvements require exponentially more investment, if we believe Altman. AI is expanding into different areas, and lots of…
The point isn't that it's a secret, it's that it's a string that shouldn't appear in any context besides the benchmark. It's an easy way to identify contamination in datasets. People often don't explicitly repeat them…
What about bets without insider participation, where you want the market to function as an aggregator of educated guesses? OP has one reaction to insider trading, but I imagine a very common alternative would be "those…
A lot of expressions in English started out as calques, outputs that process: you're paving the way!
All models are wrong; some are useful. Cognizance of that is even more critical for a model like exponential growth that often leads to extremely poor predictions quickly if uncritically extrapolated. I think "are the…
Students shouldn't be treating class material as something they "do not care to know." AI can be used in ways that lead to deeper understanding. If a student wants AI to give them practice problems, or essay feedback,…
I don't think there's a confident upper bound. I just don't see why it's self-evident that the upper bound is beyond anything we've ever seen in human history.
People are hurt by animals all the time: do you think having a higher IQ than a grizzly bear means you have nothing to fear from one? I certainly think it's possible to imagine that an AI that says the exactly correct…
Thanks for sharing this proof! As someone who enjoys math but never got myself through enough Galois theory to finish the standard proof, it's fantastic to see a proof that's more elementary while still giving a sense…
At that point, you'd be better off just using a recursive algorithm like the one in GMP. You're swapping out arbitrary-length for arbitrary-precision.
They then say there's an approximation for Fibonacci, which makes me think that's what they're calling Binet's formula. (I'd also expect an author with this mathematical sophistication to be aware of Binet's formula,…
I don't think it's controversial to say that asymptotic analysis has flaws: the conclusions you draw from it only hold in the limit of larger inputs, and sometims "larger" means "larger than anything you'd be able to…
It seems to me that much of recent AI progress has not changed the fundamental scaling principles underlying the tech. Reasoning models are more effective, but at the cost of more computation: it's more for more, not…
It's not that technical work is guaranteed to be in your codebase 10 years from now, it's that customers don't want to use a product that might be good six months from now. The actors in the best position to use new AI…
Previous experience isn't manual edge cases, it's training data. Humans have incredible scale (100 trillion synapses): we're incredibly good at generalizing, e.g., how to pick up objects we've never seen before or…
> The models keep getting better at an exponential. Isn't it the opposite? Marginal improvements require exponentially more investment, if we believe Altman. AI is expanding into different areas, and lots of…
The point isn't that it's a secret, it's that it's a string that shouldn't appear in any context besides the benchmark. It's an easy way to identify contamination in datasets. People often don't explicitly repeat them…