This I can believe tbh. It’s a very useful tool in the hands of an expert. Otherwise it’s like giving a chimp a gun.

Maybe this is why I am surprised at people’s hatred of ChatGPT. It’s borne of misuse of a tool for experts, like newcomers struggling with a C++ compiler error.

like, a video of Tao giving a demonstration?

LLMs are basically just good pattern matchers. But just like how A* search can find a better path than a human can by breaking the problem down into simple steps, so too can an LLM make progress on an unsolved problem if it’s used properly and combined with a formal reasoning engine.

I’m going to be real with you: the big insight behind almost all new mathematical ideas is based on the math that came before. Nothing is truly original the way AI detractors seem to believe.

By “does some reasoning steps,” OpenAI presumably are just invoking the LLM iteratively so that it can review its own output before providing a final answer. It’s not a new idea.

I do agree that grad students don’t exactly live in luxury, and frequently develop mental health crises. But their contributions and insight are what power their labs. Profs often have to spend so much time teaching and chasing grants that they can’t do much real research. Academia overall is in a sad state.

But Tao is a superstar, and a charismatic blogger. I’d be disappointed to learn he mistreats his grad students. (I don’t know if he even has any tbh)

You’re welcome. I am disappointed by all the downvotes floating around. I feel like your question was sincere and my answer is the cleanest cut through the flak of all of these. A reminder to everyone: downvotes are not for disagreements.

The remarks she makes have actual political sway, especially in the UK. She often talks of how “young women” will be permanently deformed by HRT and how we must stop this threat to womanhood. Well, they recently banned puberty blockers there, and I am sure that her influence had a real effect here. Politicians don’t just listen to other politicians.

Something else that I could mention is that despite being only like 50% extreme in what she is saying, she has written a book featuring a transvestite serial killer. On it’s own, that wouldn’t be so bad – I mean, in fiction anyone is allowed to be a villain, not just cis straight white men – but when combined with everything she’s been doing with her anti-transgender activism, it’s kind of telling that she has some actual hatred, it’s not just polite logical arguments. It really makes you wonder what she isn’t saying.

The main problem, as I see it, is not that her literal statements if made policy would be the most extreme in today’s overton window. The problem is that she’s made herself the face of transphobia by putting herself in the center of it. She’s taken her preexisting fame and used it to push her (admittedly not extreme) transphobia. When people say “name a transphobe,” they think of her – and this was her clear intention.

Because she has fame and power, she probably does the most direct damage to trans people overall. More than Jordan Peterson, etc.

Let’s all start using AOL and MSN messenger