In 1983, a BBC interviewer asked Richard Feynman why two magnets push each other apart — and he refused to answer it.
What he did instead is the best seven minutes on thinking ever filmed.
Bookmark & watch today, no matter what.
I've left Twitter, but I'm still writing a daily blog.
You can read today's post ("Why businesses lie about AI")
at https://t.co/aSPMM71S9l
It's also available on Mastodon at:
https://t.co/yZs6nHbzsQ
And on Bluesky at:
https://t.co/oMZCwhOqi8
"In fact, most of the economic innovations of the last thirty years make more sense politically than economically. Eliminating guaranteed life employment for precarious contracts doesn’t re- ally create a more effective workforce, but it is extraordinarily effective in destroying unions and otherwise depoliticizing labor.
The same can be said of endlessly increasing working hours. No one has much time for political activity if they’re working 60-hour weeks."
- David Graeber
In 2014, a chance visit to a Parisian bookstore led me to the most fascinating character you've never heard of. A decade later - after hundreds of interviews, dozens of archival visits, and a PhD - I'm finally telling his story. My podcast is finally out! https://t.co/My8zfklnaX
A brilliant statistician who spent 50 years studying why massive engineering projects fail realized one terrifying truth:
Individual incompetence is almost never the actual problem.
His name is W. Edwards Deming, the man who famously rebuilt Japan's post-war manufacturing empire from scratch. He argued that we obsess over individual performance and completely ignore the environment.
Here are 4 operational frameworks he used to build elite, failure-proof organizations:
Terence Tao explains the math behind today’s LLMs is actually simple. Training and running them mostly uses linear algebra, matrix multiplication, and a bit of calculus, material an undergraduate can handle. We understand how to build and operate these models.
The real mystery is why they work so well on some tasks and fail on others, and why we cannot predict that in advance. We lack good rules for forecasting performance across tasks, so progress is largely empirical.
A key reason is the nature of real-world data. Pure noise is well understood, perfectly structured data is well understood, but natural text sits in between, partly structured and partly random. Mathematics for that middle regime is thin, similar to how physics struggles at meso-scales between atoms and continua.
Because of this gap, we can describe the mechanisms but cannot yet explain capability jumps or give reliable task-level predictions. That mismatch, simple machinery versus hard-to-predict behavior, is the core puzzle.
----
Video from 'Dr Brian Keating' YT Channel (Link in comment)
‘Keynes predicted we’d have a 15-hour work week. The robots HAVE been taking our jobs — but instead of redistributing the labour, we’ve simply made up completely meaningless, pointless jobs.’
- David Graeber