Crack your knuckles, solve your problems your own way, stop comparing yourself to other people, ditch the drugs, and turn your life around. You’re the main character; this has been episode 1, now let’s do episode 2.

This isn’t entirely correct. It’s kind of like saying “SAT score” is a racist pseudoscience – which honestly I can kind of get behind, heh. “IQ” is not a property of a human the way height or eye colour is, it’s just a test score. Yes, it’s used by racist people for racist ends, but racist people use everything for racist ends. The actual science behind IQ has always shown that (a) individual variation in IQ score is vastly, vastly greater than any potential racial factor in IQ, and (b) different research findings on racial averages in IQ score are varied enough that it’s hard to draw much of a conclusion. It’s also well known that IQ tests have a bias in favour of people from western developed nations. To me, it’s most likely that racial averages are similarly biased by the test.

Dowsing is a pseudoscience – it falls apart under scrutiny. But under scrutiny, IQ test scores still correlate with success just like SAT scores do. They are slightly heritable, just like SAT scores are. It sucks, but that’s our capitalist society for you. (Let’s revolt.)

But to the OP, please understand that these correlations are nothing more than correlations, and they are meaningless when you zoom into the individual level. Statistics about groups of people only make broad guesses but are meaningless about individuals. Statistics say the average person has one ovary and one testicle. Statistics say the average American has never heard of lemmy. So, don’t let statistics define you – that would be pseudoscience.

If it helps, remember this: it’s not scientific to say “my IQ is just 76.” You should say “My most recent IQ test score was 76.”

Your explanation is wrong. There is no reason to believe that “c” has no mapping.

augh it’s annoying

1, sometimes 2.

Does anyone else have the problem where sometimes a bit of TP sticks to your labia? especially the 1-ply

https://gwern.net/improvement

there’s no “but” – this is exactly the point the author is making.

The article is NOT satire – it’s provocative. The author argues that world hunger benefits the rich. Capiche?

I hope the UN restores the article.

Interview with author: https://fee.org/articles/un-deletes-article-titled-the-benefits-of-world-hunger-was-it-real-or-satire/

that’s not satire. He unironically, disapprovingly, argues that this is the real state of the world.

https://fee.org/articles/un-deletes-article-titled-the-benefits-of-world-hunger-was-it-real-or-satire/

What does BLOB stand for?

what’s underage for hrt? like… 12?

The conversation was not originally about OSD; I had just mentioned it.

You do too by using the term FOSS instead of FLOSS

Touchée. But FLOSS the term only emphasises even more: there’s open source software, and then there’s free/libre open source software – note the distinction.

This I can believe tbh. It’s a very useful tool in the hands of an expert. Otherwise it’s like giving a chimp a gun.

Maybe this is why I am surprised at people’s hatred of ChatGPT. It’s borne of misuse of a tool for experts, like newcomers struggling with a C++ compiler error.

like, a video of Tao giving a demonstration?

LLMs are basically just good pattern matchers. But just like how A* search can find a better path than a human can by breaking the problem down into simple steps, so too can an LLM make progress on an unsolved problem if it’s used properly and combined with a formal reasoning engine.

I’m going to be real with you: the big insight behind almost all new mathematical ideas is based on the math that came before. Nothing is truly original the way AI detractors seem to believe.

By “does some reasoning steps,” OpenAI presumably are just invoking the LLM iteratively so that it can review its own output before providing a final answer. It’s not a new idea.

I do agree that grad students don’t exactly live in luxury, and frequently develop mental health crises. But their contributions and insight are what power their labs. Profs often have to spend so much time teaching and chasing grants that they can’t do much real research. Academia overall is in a sad state.

But Tao is a superstar, and a charismatic blogger. I’d be disappointed to learn he mistreats his grad students. (I don’t know if he even has any tbh)

machine learning?

If this were true, we wouldn’t need the term “FOSS.”

You’re talking about the OSD presumably. Stallman’s definition differs, and I think his terminology seems to be widely used.

U.S. vehicles currently emit 2 billion tons. So that’s very bad news.

However – I think 2030 is waaay too far in the future to predict anything about AI.

I usually use open source to mean open source and free as in lunch, but in this case I assume kovarex is talking about open source but commercial and restrictively licensed. I could be wrong.