SubiculumCode

Instead of monetary rewards, they should preface it with, "This is AI model is not very accurate on these types of questions" and then see how they fare. In some areas, AI is quite accurate, so their experience may lead to different expectations.

still is a shit article.

Speculation: Anthropic and and OpenAI become more like hedge funds, keeping their models to themselves, using their them and their compute for market/event prediction, internal tech development, and AI self improvement. I already wonder if that is what Google is doing. Why release your best models to help the competition? Their published models are good enough for 99% of consumers, and they can leverage their market dominance in other areas to put that consumer model in front of eyes. Then the decision to improve your internal models would both depend on whether you think they'd have value internally.

Yeah, I'm pretty sure AI is going to go insular within the largest companies. This will only be hastened by the growing national security concerns/awareness.

Gemini had a pop-up on my phone today, asking me if I wanted to "bring Gemini up to speed" by importing conversations from my other AI apps. This tells me that Google is threatened, or data hungry as always, or both. Open source AI, Anthropic, and OpenAI, knocking on doors.

Nice! And also, sorry if my comment came off as mean about the site. I don't think so at all...I also don't understand why your first comment on the post went dead.

There is something very interesting about looking at workspaces. As other commenters mentioned? Does your site delve into non-computer workspaces?

no it didn't

Not one creator's workspace is a messy hoard? This is an idealic, oh crap we better clean up before the photographer arrives, fantasy.

Florida is the typical and deserved target.

Fun game. The concept is good. However:

I couldn't find the go button for a while...finally realized it was part of the keyboard...that could be better

I don't get the colors on the keys, as intuitively it seems like it should be the available letters in the current position, but they don't change based on the letter spot I would be currently typing in.

I wanted to share my result with a friend who loves word games, but there was no share button. Also pasting the link does not come up with a web preview in slack/messengers.

It would be nice to be able to go back and play past days.

In terms of difficulty,hard but achievable. Might think on a difficulty slider, or a climb (first solve 5 letter, if won, 6, then 7?

Is there a general workflow for this? I usually do pip under my user. I had not thought to do a su then do my venv and pip. Heck, are we at the point where we shouldn't even do that and everything should be done in a vm container?

It might have been a prompt originally.

'Load-bearing' is a physical analogy. Other words like 'pillar' imply the same physical analogy.

I mourn the removal of Claude's Concise Style. I'd provide it a roughly drafted paragraph, ask concise-Claude to "rewrite for clarity", out comes the same paragraph, but cleaned up and perfect for grant writing.

BTW, this approach also tends to prevent certain phrases like "load-bearing", because it is working directly with something I wrote first. It also still says what I wanted to write (not writing the science for me), but saves me a lot of time reworking sentences into a final form.

I tried to recreate concise mode with a skill, but I am not convinced it does as well.

Convenient.

and one wonders even now.

You are largely misinformed, and if you are going to make such a wild (and defaming) claim, perhaps you'd back it up with some evidence.

Not only are they highly skilled, they are completely dedicated. They are straining to meed the needs of researchers right now, with staff volunteering on the weekends, against policy, to help out where they can, because they believe in their mission and are highly motivated and competent at doing it.

That's the thing. The waste isn't in Federal beuracracy, it's in Federal contracts to private industry without strong self-interested oversight. The privatization trend takes a highly motivated group (companies) to milk money from an inefficient overseer.

DOGE fired a whole bunch of NIH staff that processed high scoring grants to get them ready for Notices of Awards (the official document that starts moving funds, etc). Meanwhile, the administration now requires final approval of any grant by non NIH political staff.

Consequently, Science is slowing down (and that is outside of other shenanigans). What used to take 3 months is taking 9 or more.

For the many medical research Institutions where the dominant system for professors is soft money (no or partial tenure, salary is provided by research grants), there is a real crisis.

To try to make up the shortfall,we are submitting any more grants, doing less actual sciencee are submitting even more grants, and exacerbating the staffing issue at NIH.

DOGE found an actually highly efficient Federal government, doing what was lawfully passed legislation asked, and destroyed it anyway (instead of passing legislation to remove programs, the lawful way).

Grok keeps killing any good will faster than they ever innovate

I was wrong. I was not aware that biblatex had these features so easily available. Learned something.

This sells Zotero short in so many ways, but you do you, I guess. Have fun hand formatting between the dozen citation/reference formats every other journal chooses, seemingly at random

All these ASICS being designed and specialized for AI but none seem to be being built for consumers. Reason?

All these things add up, and when they sit on top of core issues, e.g. home ownership that is out of reach and expensive (and wasn't for their parents/grandparents), taxes that are too high as soon as you manage to make a half-decent salary, for too little benefit as far as they can feel...is it any wonder?

Nonstop. There is too much wholesale reliance on LLMs to generate content. When I use LLMs for scientific writing, I approach it differently: I write the paragraph dirty, then ask an LLM to perform a minor rewrite for "clarity", using Claude's now retired Concise Mode. This has been a great approach for scientific writing. It tends to prevent these overly used turns of phrase, it makes sure that the writing is making the points I want to make, and shortens writing time by cleaning up the dirty edges of my grammar (especially since my writing can tend towards convoluted constructions). More artistic/creative writing, I'd probably not use it at all, because then, it's usually (for me) about rthym and emotional flow.

BTW It IS an effective rhetorical phrase, but given it's ubiquity in Claude's output, I have to avoid it.

I am a developmental autism researcher using multimodal neuroimaging, standardized and experimental behavioral/cognitive assessments, with a focus on longitudinal modeling to study condevelopment of brain and behavior. I also manage lab servers, databases, I program pipelines for neuroimaging, and I also write grant applications. I also tend towards slow and rigorous over fast and loose in publications. This is both the reason why my publication land solidly mid-high tier, never publishing in low quality journals, but also not flashy enough to into the highest tiers (Biological Psychiatry is my top tier so far, a very good journal).

This preamble is to provide context: I wear many hats, and have to be familiar and competent over a wide range of things, and I must be comfortable enough to trust that I can do things I don't know, but scared enough, that I obsess in making sure I didn't get it wrong (especially if the result is suspiciously strong).

How I spend my day has completely changed since powerful AI. While I still read papers, AI often helps me find relevant papers quickly. Interested in surveying multivariate longitudinal statistical models, AI can provide generally competent overviews to help me decide on directions.

At times, I feel like it is a better neuroscientist than I am. It definitely has a larger breadth of relevant information at its immediate disposal. I'll run ideas against it, working hard to get it to not be syncophatic (usually by telling it that a local LLM suggested it but that I was unsure), and it can often raise points that I had not considered.

At times it can even seem like it is running the show, and I'm just getting in the way: Reverse Centaur.

But other times, I feel like it is helping me leverage my time to explore MY goals much more quickly, and it is empowering.

Also, Opus and ChatGPT have a real functional fixedness issue, and a hard time weighing the importance if various aspects of the research question/space. It will get stuck in solving minutea while missing the obvious large problem with an approach. I would be lying if I said that I did not get you in telling it this. One does want to feel useful after all.

AI today feels like a partner,and it is rewarding. I have yet to find a person that I can work this closely with. Usually other scientists are too busy pursuing another paper, etc.

Once AI surpasses me, this joy will go away. I am fine with a machine being better than me in almost everything, but if it's the thing I like doing, and if it's value is only judged by the extent in which it pushes the frontiers of science, I don't want to live in that world.

Most people do jobs that they are not in love with. I forsook higher paid careers in order to have a career where I can choose what to do, then work to make it happen. So I don't want to say that my experience and fears generalize, but I want AI to stay at roughly this level. A level where we aren't the meat tool, or worse, unneeded, but we are empowered for self fulfillment.

I wonder. There has been some headway in getting decentralized training runs to work.

Sounds like another Chinese Op to me; Ensuring Chinese compliance would be incredible hard to enforce or to check.

Look, I am scared of where we are heading, but I cannot see how we can change the dilemma towards mutual cooperation unless, as humans tend to do, only react massively after something really bad happens.

So, at some point, will our devices connect to their corporate offices in any environment, even without providing access to your network, short of putting it inside a Faraday Cage?

Human: I specialize in tasks in which the correctness of my solution cannot be easily specified or checked. Truuuuussssttttt meeeeee.

I'm just saying, let's not get painted into that corner completely as a species :)

Its like we don't already show faces in fMRI experiments because we know that it will often activate the fusiform face area. Its just light years away from anything dangerous, that I am compelled, as a neuroscientist, to try to shake some sense into people. This is HN, but it feels like twitter on some topics.