pera

"Never attribute to stupidity that which is adequately explained by corruption" - Argentinian saying

I still don't understand the meaning of "woke", for example here is one of the grants that are in Ted Cruz database:

https://www.usaspending.gov/award/ASST_NON_2414922_4900/

> STABLE HOMOTOPY THEORY IN ALGEBRA, TOPOLOGY, AND GEOMETRY -STABLE HOMOTOPY THEORY WAS DEVELOPED [...]

> TO ADDRESS INEQUALITY AT THE K-12 LEVEL, THE PI WILL DEVELOP AND MANAGE A PROGRAM PAIRING UNDERGRADUATES FROM HIS HOME INSTITUTION WITH STUDENTS FROM LOCAL AFTER-SCHOOL PROGRAMS FOR ONLINE TUTORING. THIS PROGRAM WOULD CIRCUMVENT CERTAIN BARRIERS TO PARTICIPATION, SUCH AS LACK OF ACCESS TO TRANSPORTATION AND FACILITIES, WHICH ARE COMMON IN TRADITIONAL OUTREACH

Is this really deemed as "neo-Marxist" "far-left" "nonsense" by Trumpists? Is this the same "wokeness" that Paul Graham was referring to in his latest essay?

Yup I have emailed dang a few times regarding wrongly flagged submissions and he has always unflagged them.

> “They apparently just sort of walked past security and said: ‘Get out of my way,’ and they’re looking for access for the IT systems, as they have in other agencies,”

Are they looking to erase climate data to dismiss climate change? It seems so pointless now, like who are they trying to fool?

Verso: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41215727

Note that GP said "since GPT 3" but the parent responded with "ChatGPT". My response was to clarify the timeframe that has elapsed since GPT-3.

Psychological denial of what exactly? And what part of the article/preprints you are commenting on?

Every time an article exposing some limitation of the current wave of LLMs is submitted to HN there are comments like yours and I genuinely cannot understand the point you are trying to make: There is no such thing as a perfect technology, everything has limitations, and we can only improve our current state of the art by studying these and iterate.

OpenAI API for GPT-3 was launched on June 11, 2020, that's four years and seven months ago:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23489653

Bizarre argument considering that the only people who did not "trust science" (and the CDC in particular) during the previous Trump administration were Trumpists themselves.

I can't even SSO into one of our orgs because of 500s/timeouts

Does anyone know if there is anything like Nepenthes but that implements data poisoning attacks like https://arxiv.org/abs/2408.02946

You could argue that nationalism and traditionalist conservativism are predominantly performative within right-wing politics in the US - if this is not immediately evident then compare these ideas against the character and actions of those who get voted by the electorate.

Can you provide a few examples? I honestly don't remember anything this bad

Few things are as performative as venture capitalists aligning their politics with the upcoming government.

The way I see it is that HN usually follows the VC money, and since there is a *lot* of money being invested on anything with the tag "AI" nowadays there is a lot of interest in the topic.

Papyrus had existed for at least a couple of thousands of years before Socrates so I'm not sure I understand your argument

> Anti-amyloids are expensive, and insurance won’t always cover them

https://www.webmd.com/alzheimers/anti-amyloid-therapies-alzh...

> the key reason donanemab isn’t available through the NHS is its cost. The treatment is estimated to cost around £25,000 a year per patient

https://theconversation.com/alzheimers-drug-approved-in-the-...

It depends who you are:

- if you are an individual then it's called "pirating copyrighted work"

- if you are a multi-billion dollar corporation then it's called "use of uncleared material for training"

Yeah crimping tools can be quite expensive... There is a long running, and still active, thread on the eevblog forum about affordable ones (mostly from AliExpress) you might find interesting:

https://www.eevblog.com/forum/reviews/affordable-crimp-tools...

You'd be surprised: Next time a recruiter from some big tech corp sends you an e-mail try explaining why you don't want to join them.

I agree. This is what I have been doing:

- Respond with a template explaining why I don't want to work for Google|Amazon|Meta|Microsoft|Apple

- Include information of some tech unions the recruiter could join and give reasons to do so

- Talk to colleagues about concerns and what can we do to mitigate current power imbalances

- Talk to family and friends about the industry, its impact on society, and provide help if they would like to try alternative technologies

What's more likely: (i) famous mathematician expressing his frustration regarding how his previous internet community is now full of Nazis, or (ii) famous mathematician casually saying Nazis suck so to be perceived as morally superior by some random readers?

To me the second option is an extremely bizarre take and I cannot imagine why anyone would even consider it.

It's scary to think that we are moving into this direction: I can see how in the next few years politicians and judges will use LLMs as neutral experts.

And all in the hand of a few big tech corporations...

It's not clear to me whether AGI is necessary for solving most of the issues in the current generation of LLMs. It is possible you can get there by hacking together CoTs with automated theorem provers and bruteforcing your way to the solution or something like that.

But if it's not enough then maybe it might come as a second-order effect (e.g. reasoning machines having to bootstrap an AGI so then you can have a Waymo taxi driver who is also a Fields medalist)

Maybe AGI as a goal is overvalued: If you have a machine that can, on average, perform symbolic reasoning better than humans, and at a lower cost, that's basically the end game, isn't it? You won capitalism.

It's alright that you like LLMs but you don't need to name-call ("luddites", "snowflakes") those who don't find them as useful as you do.

The data is in the linked survey: https://www.sellcell.com/blog/iphone-vs-samsung-ai-survey/

- 11.1% of iPhone's users felt the AI features were "very valuable"

- 5.9% of Samsung Galaxy's users felt the AI features were "very valuable"

> If I take the Willow announcement at face value (in particular, the QEC claims) [...]

Considering that Google's 2019 claim of quantum supremacy was, at the very least, severely overestimated (https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1910.09534) I would wait a little bit before making any decisions based on the Willow announcement.

Sorry you are right, somehow I'd missed that part