tossandthrow

As long as these are not accidental invariants.

I have had this conversation with the team. I lead, who started to use properties of the ID for ordering etc.

An ID is an identifiers. It supports exactly the operation of comparing two IDs to establish identity.

When you start to treat them as something else that is not guaranteed, you will see weird things happening.

You don't have to. You can absorb the risk. Which most orgs do.

You are aware that many places don't accept cash, right?

I should be the last one to defend the existing system.

But IMHO DEI answers the wrong question.

Worthwhile lives does not come from equal access to the hamster wheel.

I am much more pro UBI structures og negative taxation - which are inherently difficult to make descriminatory as there is no personal judgement of the people to receive it.

You could also say that DEI is easier to defend when human work was more valuable and capital was cheaper.

Or maybe the metaphor works alright, but the math community are still building resilience to this change.

Yes, so you are elevating the probable to the possible.

This is like me saying that it is more productive to work using pen and paper because it is not prone to electric failures in thunderstorms.

It is right under a certain low probability event that I myself can define and you cannot refute it.

Back in the 2006 I did not have to login to my Windows machine, I also did have my configuration.

It is because you guys are entirely logged into a very small subset of systems.

You are apparently also not able to separate the different concerns of authentication and identification.

You could easily envision a system where you can ID without any auth.

You being narrow minded is not me gaslighting.

Arguably it is inherent to drug discovery that there are aspects of the process we don't understand - but we can conclude that a drug works.

So naturally, doctors should be much more welcoming to these types of inventions.

It is likely also a blind angle for mathematicians. Inherently they know exactly what goes on to whatever granularity they please. One of the benefits with not having to consider the real world.

What?

You can easily have you own configuration without logging in.

Arguably, you'd still have better productivity had you not have to sign-in.

So you are still making a trade-off

Ah yes, you found the perfect argument to give sec people full and uncontrolled reign.

Not is it probable that people will take over our system. But is it possible.

You are paltering.

The premise was not to enhance security, but to design a world where security and productivity are not tradeoffs.

I would love to hear about a world where security and productivity are not counter acting forces.

For a start, most people would certainly be more productive if they hadn't had to authenticate themselves.

If you can just create a world for that simple case, then I will rest my case.

This is the likely outcome. It was a company employing 2 people.

What does it mean to understand?

My own prediction is the opposite. I believe that a lot more humans will have a much deeper understanding of math, as you have llms to teach us.

However, this will only unlock if we get a hold of our own attention.

This "joke" usually comes up in discussions like this.

Though it is kind of wasted. Dihydrogen monoxide would be the chemical compound without any salts, minerals or other additives we normally get from water.

It would likely not be beneficial for you to drink it as opposed to water.

I thought he was ai

Ofcause you can!

You just ask the business to advertise a single price.

Naturally businesses pass on the cost of doing business, it is literally their job.

Pricing just needs to be transparent - this is a key requirement for an efficient market. And something the US is failing at miserably.

I honestly think a us ban would get us quite far, also in a global setting.

My initial complaint was merely that the interest rate it not neutral to buyers.

Yes, so the 500k is not fixed - that should be obvious from these calculations.

I said that the monthly payment is the same. Not that you pay the same amount towards your loan.

An optional extra payment is worth more when interest rates are higher.

Ie. An optional extra payment of 1000$ will pay your 150$ a year in saved interest when the rate is 15% and only 15$ when the rate is 1.5%.

Everything else being equal, optional payments has a higher value, which represent value to the buyer.

No?

Paying down a high interest mortgage will always have bigger impact on the dollar than paying down a low interest mortgage.

Neutral for buyers? Absolutely not.

As a buyer you rather want to take out a loan in a high interest rate environment than a low interest rate environment, given that the monthly payment is the same.

1000 usd extra paid towards your mortgage actually makes a difference when the rate is 15% compared to when it is 1.5%

Why?

You might never have tried to program before, so I don't blame it on you.

But most programmers, even experienced ones, see grammar and type errors regularly.

You are right. I am imprecise.

Languages allow a certain flexibility in their grammars - you can read a sentence without that adhering it exactly to the grammar.

Games and programming languages (including lean) does not allow this flexibility.

A very intelligent person would likely also reason in terms of probably outcomes before correcting a statement to adhering entirely to the grammar.

Certainly it must be like that, otherwise reviews in math was rendered moot.

Do we blame research mathematicians for not adhering to the grammar?

Llm systems are not really build for adhering to a grammar (other than "a string og tokens").

It is also not clear whether the llm adhering to a grammar is necessary for intelligent agents.

Certainly,a harness can easily correct for it.

What a shame that we get a bird ckassifier by the samle technology we use to recognize cancer and other illnesses.