patlsc

programmer 🇺🇸

[patlsc @_patlsc]

@ricgalbraith @jacksfilms we thought he meant a physical boot but it turned out to be a metaphysical one

[patlsc @_patlsc]

@locust9 have you done game development? im willing to bet i could make in a day something you would consider to be "40% of skyrim"

but you are right that games will die like novels died. not because there are infinite good novels, but because nobody will find a good novel made today

[patlsc @_patlsc]

@FormDeterminer sentenced to 1000 pages of philosophers with no math background describing the implications of Quantum Mechanics and Godel

[patlsc @_patlsc]

@alexriesart they want to kill 99.99% of humanity why does this surprise you

[patlsc @_patlsc]

@relizarov how would you prove or deduce this?

[patlsc @_patlsc]

@_floatyP @gavinmuellerphd italians are genetically proletarian

[patlsc @_patlsc]

@PosterInternet 15 years ago

[patlsc @_patlsc]

@torontomusicguy @Paulcull401 It's a genius commentary on the post-AI internet. you're just looking through meaningless shit forever

[patlsc @_patlsc]

@PinstripeBungle the current plan of openai is to build AGI then ask it how to make money (i am being 100% unironic)

[patlsc @_patlsc]

@ZoharKo @Ahmadreza_1729 I think the convex hull argument is more accurate for subjective tasks. AI is unlikely to make new forms of art because it can't proactively deduce what is good except by comparing to existing data. but for pure math maybe the sky is the limit because its all deductive

[patlsc @_patlsc]

@iklone densha otoko, otaku no video, akihabara geeks... its all gone

[patlsc @_patlsc]

@codeshaunted every algorithm is O(1) on a real computer

[patlsc @_patlsc]

@the_aiju mathematical statistics has some of the most interesting results because it relates to reality in an immediate way

[patlsc @_patlsc]

@Rohanburdened @thomasfbloom usually not because analytic arguments rely on the genral tendencies of numbers and functions, while "All A" arguments have to account for their exact behavior which is far harder. collatz is another example

[patlsc @_patlsc]

@Amir_Safavi_N because for each LLM math proof there's thousands of failures. failures cost nothing in math because they are LLM-checkable, but in physics nobody's going to read LLM output all day in hopes of the occasional insight

[patlsc @_patlsc]

@d4ktr @kimmonismus you would be correct

[patlsc @_patlsc]

@Quasilocal for similar reasons there is no incentive to contribute to open source software in the future

[patlsc @_patlsc]

@tranche_cheddar no it's because every other task is data-bottlenecked

[patlsc @_patlsc]

@ThomBrady5 @Quasilocal once the evil cabal of (((mathematics))) falls surely capitalists will stop offshoring jobs

[patlsc @_patlsc]

@SecessioPlebiss i get the impression that basically anything in a humanities journal is present in a better, easier, and more in depth form in books written by professors for general audiences