4/14: @elonmusk makes an offer to buy Twitter
4/15: Twitter board rejects the offer
4/22: The Large Hadron Collider restarts
4/25: Twitter board is set to accept Elon's offer
Physicists long worried that LHC may trigger the end of the Universe. They just did not know how.
@michaelaubry Have you tried AI consulting for real (not software) companies? I imagine most of them don’t have people like you and might need help setting themselves up these days.
@brivael What’s worse, you participate in it more than willingly. You convince yourself that you need that VP of Sales before even the VC asks for it because you know they will. Self-censorship is a much stricter straight jacket than externally enforced censorship.
Elon said something on X that I thought was pretty deep. I liked it and I thought it explained a lot of people's feelings. Then I thought a bit more about it, and now I am not so sure...
Very true, even in college. 40 years ago, we had this legendary tough professor of quantum mechanics at MIPT, Voldemar Smilga (these days students might have nicknamed him Voldemort) who would test the midterm homework that consisted of 10 very difficult problems, by taking the student’s handwritten notebook that had probably 20 pages or so, bending the corner of a random page to show a tiny snippet of a formula, and ask - which problem is this from? If you actually solved these problems, those Greek letters were indeed seared in your brain, so even a three-letter snippet was enough. But if you copied the solution, you would not know it. Simple and effective.
Endorse this! And while at it, skip the literature review too, unless it’s material to the paper. Reserve that for the review articles and PhD dissertations. Cite only the papers you actually read that actually influence your research in either direction. Cite to agree or disagree, but not to check mark.
It would also be good to have an explicit “surprise me” feed, which is designed to be orthogonal to who I follow and what I normally view. This would allow the users to easily check out things they don’t normally see, become aware of the alternative (not opposite, but unrelated!) views etc, while not contaminating their feed. Anything I click or like on “surprise me” feed should not influence my normal feed, unless I explicitly decide to follow that person or perhaps mark as “move to my feed”. On the other hand, anything I explicitly mark as “not interesting” should disappear from both feeds. There is a finite number of dimensions that I want to keep an eye on, there is an infinite number of dimensions that are out there for occasional scavenging and discovery. In the primary feed the focus should be on addition and engagement, in the “surprise me” feed the focus should be on subtraction and narrowing down, that way they become both complementary and useful. What do you think @elonmusk and @nikitabier ?
It would also be good to have an explicit “surprise me” feed, which is designed to be orthogonal to who I follow and what I normally view. This would allow the users to easily check out things they don’t normally see, become aware of the alternative views etc, while not contaminating their feed. Anything I click or like on “surprise me” feed should not influence my normal feed, unless I explicitly decide to follow that person.
I have a hypothesis about the Anthropic Claude source code leak. I think it was an April Fool’s prank, but someone just posted it prematurely. Another downside of too much efficiency.
@WKCosmo Landau theoretical minimum was a pass/fail exam. I re-took the theoretical minimum on quantum mechanics three times, each time learning it deeper, and each time being more difficult than prior. After that I could probably give the exam to the next generation :)
@naval The only difference between stubbornness and perseverance is the eventual success. If only one could figure a way to know which is which while it’s going on.