Please correct my ignorance, but didn’t Marx think Capitalism wouldn’t last this long?

I mean a slaver does work, it’s just that job shouldn’t exist in the first place.

Not long ago Walmart got fined by the CCP for poor food practices. Instead of saying “we disagree with the judgement” they licked the boot and said they look forward working with the government to resolve the situation. Point is, corporations should be afraid of the government, clearly Google is not afraid of the EU and as a result I expect similar behavior from them in the future.

Conway’s law strikes again!

Lossy compression with no internal mechanism for detecting information corruption.

And the execs that made thr decision to fire in the first place will be punished by giving them bonuses.

“yeah there’s a new giant structure and there’s a new persistent and pervasive sound in the region that both appeared around the same time, but there’s no data connecting the two. It could just be the sound of my own ego”

IDK, cobol programmers still do well these days

Why is Xavier Becerra on the list? The Democratic governor front runner for California?

The description that the LLM did it on its own is subjective at best. I’ll just leave it at that. Have a good one

It’s not “bested” by the LLM though, a mathematician used the LLM as a tool to disprove a conjecture. Subtract the mathematicians from the process and the LLM would not have successfully completed the task. It would be more accurate to say a mathematician with an LLM was able to best a mathematician who did not have an LLM. Which is cool, but we don’t need to pretend the LLM is not a tool but something that “understands” math like a mathematician

You are the one collapsing tool use into a binary when there are varying degrees of competency and hand holding.

So why are you allergic to people talking about the quality of the tools in regards to capability?

How are you able to understand it’s capability without understanding what tools it is capable of manipulating to effect?

If you are not interested in how it completes the task then you are not an authority on how it works.

It’s relevant to what the parent was saying about LLMs. The success of the LLM in using mathematical tools does not contradict what they were saying. To then accuse them of lying because of a misunderstanding is… bad form.

Aren’t you the least bit curious what tools they gave the LLM and how the LLM used those tools? It’s like back in math class you are asked to solve a quadratic formula but you forgot how. So you use the calculator to try different numbers and the calculator is telling you if you are getting closer. Sure I got the right answer, but it’s hardly a testament to my math skills.

You know the “DeepMind and OpenAi models” is the hint that the LLM model is not the one doing the math. The LLM provides a hypothesis and the DeepMind model provides grounding or feedback on whether the hypothesis even makes sense or works.

Using computers to search for a counter example to a conjecture isn’t exactly new ground and I suspect they did so with the aide of some harness tweaks like some numerical LSP. Like cool, it pushed the envelope but like what the parent said, they grafted on the ability to do a specific task.

Fair enough. The crux of my argument is self awareness is an evolutionary trait for evolutionary purposes. If you sim/emulate the same processes in a different environment then it does not serve the evolutionary purposes of the organism, its definitionally not self awareness. To put it another way, the system doing the simulation is less efficient then the thing it is simulating. And energy efficiency is part of what self awareness delivers to an evolutionary system. To be clear I am not ruling out a machine can be aware of its own economy as part of making it intelligent, I am just saying a simulation distorts the very economy that self awareness is to operate on.