Daniel Bruegmann

software engineering, mathematics, physics

[Daniel Bruegmann @DanielBruegmann]

@staysaasy min

[Daniel Bruegmann @DanielBruegmann]

@eatonphil Very appropriate reminder that more than anything else LLM writing is like normal writing.

[Daniel Bruegmann @DanielBruegmann]

@kmett I vaguely remember that the GHC runtime reduces indirections and selector thunks during garbage collection. Is there a plan to get something similar with THC?

[Daniel Bruegmann @DanielBruegmann]

@ProfNoahGian It might have good for progress to have statement C as a stepping stone.
The Millenium Problems are not the hardest conceivable problems.
Also, getting another million dollars as prize money for A and B sounds possible.

[Daniel Bruegmann @DanielBruegmann]

@LiuZuxin How many were tried with how much effort?

[Daniel Bruegmann @DanielBruegmann]

@DavidMarzocca Can this genie tell us whether statement A in the Navier-Stokes Millenium problem is true?

[Daniel Bruegmann @DanielBruegmann]

@BenjaminHouy Germany's "public" part of the system is multi-payer and decentralized. There is no central government agency running it. Statutory is a better translation.

[Daniel Bruegmann @DanielBruegmann]

@petergostev A timely but old-fashioned announcement would be sufficient in most cases.
Right now everyone is left wondering.

[Daniel Bruegmann @DanielBruegmann]

@OpenAI old-fashioned announcements would be nice

[Daniel Bruegmann @DanielBruegmann]

@NoahJSnyder or the agents are saying they cannot identify a gap in the natural language proof but are failing to turn it into a formalized proof using lean

[Daniel Bruegmann @DanielBruegmann]

@IlinVasily29521 The Hodge conjecture has much less clear-cut criteria for being solve as a Millenium problem than P vs NP or Navier-Stokes. It might be disproven, but the Millenium problem amended.

[Daniel Bruegmann @DanielBruegmann]

Maybe they have a counterexample but are figuring out if whether to present it as solving the Millenium problem or as a cause for a modification of the problem statement, for which there is a lot of leeway for the five Millenium problems other than P vs NP and Navier-Stokes.
This would explain the phrase substantial progress used earlier, too. (I believe in the NYT article)

[Daniel Bruegmann @DanielBruegmann]

@tejotaefe why?

[Daniel Bruegmann @DanielBruegmann]

@scottnarmstrong @AnthropicAI @GoogleDeepMind @OpenAI

[Daniel Bruegmann @DanielBruegmann]

@scottnarmstrong an old-fashioned announcement would be nice

[Daniel Bruegmann @DanielBruegmann]

An old-fashioned announcement would be nice.

[Moderately Successful Geometer @cg_geometry]

Where's the alleged Hodge counterexample? (I'm not being snarky here. I want an update!)

[Daniel Bruegmann @DanielBruegmann]

@DanielMiessler Dissolving the Fermi Paradox https://t.co/N5Dh8xjJjz

log normal random variables are relevant for estimating p(doom), too

[Daniel Bruegmann @DanielBruegmann]

@kareem_carr importance of log normal for products of random variables applies to p(doom), too
https://t.co/N5Dh8xjJjz

[Daniel Bruegmann @DanielBruegmann]

@mcuban @grok @grok explain relevance of log normal random variables in the context of p(doom)-ermism, along the lines of "Dissolving the Fermi Paradox" by Anders Sandberg, Eric Drexler and Toby Ord
https://t.co/HBpkwsuUWw

[Daniel Bruegmann @DanielBruegmann]

relevant to p(doom), too
https://t.co/N5Dh8xjJjz