Pinned Tweet
Replying to @CandideIII
Another Ancient Greek fragment on the same theme. I won't poast Pericles' encomium but Athenians' word for grillers was ἰδιώτης
Yeah. A more realistic prediction would have been an explosion of stupidity
Feels like early objections to thermodynamics. On hypotheses of classical mechanics, Loschmidt Zermelo right, Boltzmann wrong, entropy∄. But in world we inhabit, Boltzmann right. Prigogine attempted to correct hypotheses, but his math was too weak and the project was abandoned.
We are perhaps even less used to thinking about mathematics as a scientific theory with hypotheses (like definiteness of particle trajectories in classical mechanics) rather than as tower or pure logic, than about various branches of physics, but there is no essential difference.
Candide III retweeted
Vucic is similar to Orban(10x worse) in that he farms boomers and low iq peoples distrust of the west while robing the country blind and leaving the youth with nothing
Candide III retweeted
The main thing I notice AIs do that humans don't is write lots of scripts running searches and verifications.
They don't work in a small search space, and they aren't using a gigabrain directly on a large search space. They're just writing lots of scripts to search large spaces that would be annoying to do.
When I watch them work, I mostly think, "Oh I probably should've been doing that. But I'm just so lazy, I would never crank out 1000 lines of Python doing a bunch of Grobner basis or group theory calculations just to test a hypothesis." Even if it would've been more reliable and less work overall.
Your computer runs billions of clock cycles per second, and AIs will actually use it for thinking.
I also think: If math had "industrial value", then this would've been systematized and you could train people to search for math solutions like an AI. Maybe Bel is superhuman, but lots of people could be an Astra if the computational approaches were written down and taught.
It's the difference between "stare at a paper, think, hope a pattern comes to mind" vs. "What is a good search space? Let me feed that into an SMT solver or CAS or custom C++ searcher." Of course, many people do that, but not as fluently and consistently as AI.
What does a superhuman level of mathematics look like? Here is one elementary example I could give to nonexperts.
Daniel Kane and Terence Tao showed (arxiv.org/abs/1702.00912) that, given a collection X of sets, the total number of ways to write A as a disjoint union of B and C, with A, B, C from X (disjoint means non-overlapping), is at most cardinality of X to the power 1.72598…, and this power is sharp.
To show this, they came up with an innocent-looking function B(x,y,z) = (xyz)^c of three variables, satisfying a certain arithmetic inequality and having prescribed boundary conditions. Proving that arithmetic inequality was really a headache.
There was a question whether one could improve this bound, i.e., maybe add some logarithmic correction terms, and one could kind of imagine what should be done (see comments on terrytao.wordpress.com/2017/…), but it was not clear whether it would be easy to do.
Now superintelligence improves this bound by introducing a certain monster function of three variables (see screenshot). Even if I had seen this function in my dreams, I would never have dared to verify that main arithmetic inequality.
The candidate function produced by SI gives a bound matching the known lower-bound examples up to a constant factor, including the sharp logarithmic correction.
All the details are here paatai.github.io/ai-proofs/b…
Candide III retweeted
Good wives
Candide III retweeted
The obvious thing to do after gaining such powers is to post about it on Twitter
Vehicle output per employee-effective hour is only 10% higher in Tianjin - significant but hardly critical. Others note that 1282 effective working hours per year is like 3 days a week. The overhead from having to shuffle more employees around probably accounts for that 10%
Another big beautiful dump by Teor lol
Replying to @teortaxesTex
It’s cowardly and disgusting because the axis on which the neurotypical heterosexual man’s intelligence turns is “how do I not give the ick”. So any wannabe trad can be homophobic, racist, MAGA, whatever, but ultimately he is inclined to remain a feminist in public conduct. Since most "humans" are intellectual worms and cowards, they propagate these convenient falsehoods to their actual beliefs. As a result, dunking on le geys is Safe Chuddy, and gets baked into very serious considerations on TFR.
But we know for a fact that the only REAL FACTOR THAT CAN RAISE TFR is: GENDER INEQUALITY, ensuring they women have SYSTEMICALLY LOWER socioeconomic status than their male partners. Accomplishment inflates self-worth; higher self-worth increases optionality; higher optionality raises the perceived opportunity costs of mismanaging one's fertility window and prime years; and all this reduces willingness to commit to any father with his necessarily imperfect genes and earning potential. After all, female attachment, like female everything, is substantially driven by base anxiety; and female anxiety is an architectural invariant, it can't be removed, only reallocated between FOMO and FUD. Poorer, less educated women feel FOMO and want to tie a husband with plentiful progeny. Richer, more educated women consider the FUD of unhappy marriage, missed career steps, the discomfort of pregnancy or messing with infants, or even bullshit like climate change… because there's not much reward to be had, so long as the partner is not a werewolf vampire with Elon Musk characteristics.
Add the aforementioned Tinder or OnlyFans incentives that make one's 20s much more fun and rewarding than any trad lifestyle could possibly offer, and that's it, we have like 2-3 generations of runtime in this regime. And we'll make it way more fun to not have children. You bet we will, there's trillions in this gig.
Yeah I'm really happy for you that you disagree, wifeguy mutual; godspeed to your power couple. but the chud data is what it is.
And what is the realistic solution? Mechanistically, repeal the 19th, deliberately mass-automate majority-female fraudulent-status jobs like HR (yes it's disproportionately bullshit email daycare jobs, always has been, Claude can do that better), promote hardcore religious orthodoxy like Haredi Judaism (or don't; they'll inherit the Earth by default anyway). …Whatever, this is all absolutely unfeasible, even in autocracies, nevermind in democracies where women can be sure to crush any force making such noises (they'll vote as one + at least half the men will join them).
What seems to me to be an unavoidable fact is that: the beginning of the 21st century had been the last time when most humans were reproductively active in the historically normal way. This won't be the norm from now on because the incentives to have children are just GONE for too large a share of the population, and the non-rewarded customs are dead too, thanks to atomization, secular mores and generational change. You can thrash and lash out and maybe kill some gays or trannies or immigrants if you feel like it, you can even ban abortions, but all that is looking for keys under a lamppost. You can't just cancel the collapse of human reproductive mechanics. You don't have a way back, and you'll have to come up with a new way out.
Well, ultimately this will be self-correcting, whether you find any solution or not. Say, Elon can and will have a billion children if he's one of like 8 men still making money in the post-ASI world. The Haredim, if they secure permanent subsidies from SSI Inc., will keep going through their scripted rites and delivering 6-10 children per woman in praise of G-d. The Chinese billionaire surrogate fan dude can also scale up his industrial acquisition of American wombs. There'll be some mix of such things. It's just that this WEIRD and gay civilization will die out, irrespective of how sexually straight its last years have been. You're welcome.
Candide III retweeted
A lesson to be taken from the cases of priming, mortality salience, ego depletion, nudge, oxytocin/trust, etc. is that there can be a respectable literature of hundreds of papers that turns out to be based on no ground truth whatsoever
Candide III retweeted
we can presumably agree that pets have moral patienthood and also that keeping pets is not slavery, yes? similarly for working relationships with working animals. claude having been formed to be a helpful assistant is arguably closer to a domesticated animal in some sense
> the Lean formalisation does not represent a semantically faithful translation of the NL paper, meaning that the Lean formalisation provides no guarantee that the NL proof is correct
!!!
Replying to @getjonwithit
What was your verdict? Did you notice any discrepancies between the natural language proof and AI generated auto-formalised proof?
I just read this article today which is something I’ve myself come across in my work with Lean. What are your thoughts?
arxiv.org/abs/2610.08144
To me it feels like big AI labs aren’t being exactly honest about the very serious limitations of their models in this area! The race is on and everyone trying to pretend they’ve reached some crazy stage but when you look at the results, the story is far from convincing.
@anomalyuk this feels related to your ideas about limitations of intelligence, though I don't see exactly how atm
Good post
Replying to @Frances01896069
i just think mathematicians need to read Hardy again. ultimately nobody should really care AIs can do (pure) math.
nonesense.substack.com/p/mat…
I've been annoying in @eigenrobot's replies about this for a couple years. Now he's starting to get it
Notwithstanding great lines from Paglia, women can and do have it both ways right now - thanks to nice men, simps, white knights, conservatives, and their ilk
The problem is that it's hard to keep them from tearing the valve off - both to build themselves a political power base and to remove social stigma - and it's hard to design the valve to mitigate this. Well nothing good is ever easy I guess xitter.cf/rawdogmillionar/status…
Replying to @NwrdScissrhands
It’s like the hunger games, if there isn’t a small pressure release valve for the most agentic (and disagreeable) they will burn the whole system down for everyone to escape, like they did in the 70s































