If Joe Biden did this, he would have been removed by end of day

Idk shit about math but I watched this dude on curt jaimungals podcast and he was super cool, clearly a genius but no ego, charming af. Comments here check out

X has the most bizarre ads. Is Jagmeet even in politics anymore? How many retarded boomers even use this app that they are spending money on these terrible ai ads?

Might be true but if it is, it's not that the office is so great but that people have no idea what to do with themselves so they need to kill 2+ hours of their day getting dressed and commuting so they have less time to stew in their own negative thoughts

Elon got them bots working overtime on any US election thread

Booomers at Mandarin

"Anyone can make games with AI" Okay go ahead, go make one. An actual good one. If you remove the technical hurdle, all you get is a bunch of good looking boring stuff. Games are hard because the actual concept of a game is not intuitive. Games are about rules, boundaries, mechanics, ideas, and how they all feel to engage in. Look at how many terrible games release every year with 7, 8,9 figure budgets but still suck. Ubisoft pumps out Assassins Creed slop yearly and none of them are any good. Meanwhile, there are indie games with potato graphics that still retain tons of players. Look at Slay the Spire - it could look a lot better but it doesnt need to. You could vibe code STS today in a few days, but the real magic is the fine tuning of the cards, the drop rates, and the concept of the classes and emergent gameplay the devs honed in on. They sifted through a shitload of telemetry to figure out where players were quitting, and to figure out hte right shape for their meta-progression, which is perhaps the main ingredient in their secret sauce. You cannot vibe code that stuff. You can vibe code the tests and telemetry but you would need to know what to look for, and you would need some feeling for what players find fun, because fun in video games involves a certain level of failure which is very finely tuned. Too much and its frustrating. Too little and its boring.

What's with all the young men who get upset when someone on twitter tells them to try and meet women in person? Are you all just complete pussies? Have the new generation of young men internalized the idea that they should not be subject to the crucial developmental stage of courtship which involves getting rejected by women regularly, and often? Get over yourselves. Get in there. The reason you're afraid of rejection is the same reason you have no success with women. You can blame the apps or society or tiktok, but in the end it's really just a mixture of fear and shame. You hate the status quo of how the dating apps work, but you refuse to get off of them because it's safer to sit and swipe and get ghosted than to get out there and stare a woman in the eyes as she tells you she's not interested in you. I think you all spend too much time on tiktok watching clips of clickbait-creators complaining about 'creepy men'. That's all bullshit designed for engagement. There are limitless ways to do low-stakes approaches that are respectful and signal nothing creepy or aggressive to the woman. There is always a fast, easy out when a woman isn't interested. If we take the analogy of courtship vs finding a job, approaching in person is like skipping straight to the first interview versus being a single resume in a massive stack of them. On the apps, you are commodified into a thumb-swipe consisting of a handful of pictures that has to compete with dozens/hundreds of other matches the woman has on her screen. Your pictures are probably not the best ones. And your opening text messages are probably not enough to move the needle either. So you get a match, text, nothing happens and then you grow resentful. Or worse, you don't even get a match. Worse still, you end up losing confidence in yourself. And then you come on Twitter and complain that us old fucks "don't get it" and that our advice sucks. You're wrong. You're just afraid of rejection. That's it. You're running away from a situation that will elicit an emotion. Nothing wrong with that, but if you never come to grips with what the actual problem is, you will forever run from the emotion instead of just feeling it. Approaching a woman in public achieves one immediate, all-important thing. It signals to her: I am not a complete pussy. It also signals that for all of life's innumerable challenges, you possess the qualities that can overcome them, which is exactly what she is looking for in a man. If the current culture is that nobody is approaching anymore, isn't the value of doing it VASTLY more valuable? If you can't approach her to say hi, what can she really expect out of you?

Now try finding one of your documents using searchlight

goat shit tbh

At age 9 I told my parents I wanted to become a lawyer. At 27 I passed the bar, earning my legal license. Two weeks later, I got diagnosed with MS. I hacked it for about 2 years until the disease rapidly worsened, forcing me to medically retire from a profession I spent 8 years studying to get into. In the years since then, I've had to really reckon with my identity. It is extremely alienating being a young person who isn't working, and who spent their entire life working toward one thing only to have it taken away overnight. If I'm not a lawyer, who am I? Surely I am more than that. Ask any lawyer, doctor, whatever, if they are more than their job, and they will of course say yes. We all think we are, but most of us don't ever have to face up to it vanishing. I think people underestimate the degree to which their jobs give them a core pillar of their meaning. Even a shitty job gives you some sense of responsibility or duty- even a job you hate. We all want financial freedom, we want to escape boring and meaningless work, but if most jobs were eliminated tomorrow, society would probably worsen for a long time before it improved. Our biology did not evolve through idleness. Most people never get a chance to be idle for a period of years without some additional stress of feeding themselves or worrying about their economic future. I think if they did, they would realize winning the lottery genuinely won't make you happy. It will only remove money problems, leaving all the other ones. I got to live that - years passed where I was too sick to do much of anything. It was dreadful. I didn't have to worry about finances, but I couldn't really 'enjoy' it. I was, among other things, ashamed, bored, and totally rudderless. My friends and peers were building careers and seemingly lives while I stood still. But time was passing just the same for me as for them. Ultimately people are not going to really feel any of this intuitively until AI comes for their thing, and puts them out of a job, out of a career, and reduces whatever skills they have to a prompt.

I think people summarizing the math community's trepidations as "Lol u mad" are missing the point a bit here. The LLMs can only do math because humans have done it for millenia. We might get recursive intelligence soon, but we still want human mathematicians who can train future humans - we do not want to entirely give up our technical traditions and pathways to education. I don't think these are the people we want to erase with AI. We want to erase disease, poverty, improve our clean energy production, remove drudgery from human civilization. It's just incidental that the formal structure of math lends itself well to the kind of work LLMs can do well. Applied sciences like medicine require more work, and perhaps leaps in math via AI are a faster route to get there. But I think we can have a holistic view on things without trying to dunk on people who have been working invisibly to build the foundation of knowledge these LLMs are now leveraging.

This is strangely honest in a very deep way. He's not telling you the definition of socialism. He's telling you "in the American context" but then he's actually honest within that domain. Socialism in America is a catch-all term for any policies or ideas they want to prevent from becoming popular. Boys playing in girls' sports? SOCIALISM! Immigration issue? SOCIALISM! Paying a normal amount of money for an ordinary medical treatment? SOCIALISM! Banning Congress from insider trading? SOCIALISM! They're smart, they pivoted away from COMMUNISM into something much broader, which most Americans still couldnt define, so they make the definition amorphous and then accept it.

I know fuck all about math, but I think this is a very surface level analysis of what the mathematicians are trying to guard against. Yes, some of them are upset that they are getting scooped by OpenAI. But think a bit past the current people alive today to the future. What is the future of math? I don't mean who gets credit for the discoveries - that isn't that important. What's more important is how humans will continue to be in the loop when AI is doing all of the frontier work in math. I don't think we should ever have a situation where we are bereft of technical humans who can have some handle on high level math. Obviously they will not match the AI but that's not the point. We want people who still at least engage, probe, and to some level understand what is happening. How you motivate people to enter this field is the question, because this is a difficult subject requiring years and decades of work to become an expert in one small corner. If the AI will take all of the credit for discoveries, is there great reward in being an AI-checker, or an AI-monitor? Maybe if it's paid well enough. It won't be, because we have proof today of many critically important jobs that are paid like absolute shit. Pure math is not applied math, and it is certainly not medicine. This example doesn't work at all. Perhaps some problems in pure math can lead to real life changes in something like materials science, but that's the direct relationship this person is trying to paint - "imagine if doctors complained chatgpt discovered the cure to cancer before they did". We are all waiting impatiently for AI to literally change our lives in the biomedical sphere. It's not the same domain as math.

If things really do take off and the computers take over the highest levels of math and science research, it will forever remain a question of just how far we could have gotten if this level of AI had been delayed by a few decades.

this meme but without the irony

Not buying it. Chess is perhaps the most "computer-ish" sport/game that humans play on a mass scale, and the clankers have been better at it than us for almost 20 years. Humans still play, billions around the world. We still compete, and people still care about the competition