Skip Navigation

Posts
6
Comments
490
Joined
3 yr. ago

  • We really need to work harder at poisoning the training data for math problems.

  • My generous statement: Knuth, being a scientist, is used to an "adversary" that plays fair. As we have known for decades, a scientist can be tricked in situations that a magician will see through. This applies all the more now with the Sycophancy Engines, which make mathematics into a casino vacation. Just one more prompt, bro. Just one more prompt.

    My less generous statement: Knuth is almost 90 years old. Sure, age doesn't imply a person will become a doddering fool, but people do tend to slow down, to have less energy and more need to spend it managing their health. "Thinking about a problem for a few weeks" counts for less in a situation like that.

    My extremely ungenerous statement: Hey, remember when Michael Atiyah claimed to have proved the Riemann hypothesis in 2018? And the community reaction was a pained, "Atiyah is one of the great mathematicians... of the 20th century."

  • I know I've said somewhere on here before that "Harry Potter for pop science nerds" is fanfiction on easy mode, but I'll stand by it.

  • That header pic sure takes me back

  • Felicitations!

    ("A job," Blake thinks. "I need to find one of those.")

  • I would also not put my finger on those microscope slides

  • womp, and wait for it, womp

  • Do you want Tylers Durden? Because this is how you get Tylers Durden.

  • Train your chatbot on TV Tropes, and the password will always be swordfish.

  • The post names Joscha Bach as someone Aella tried to exclude.

    You do not under any circumstances have to hand it to Aella

  • "Yes, I am hammering myself in the balls. But maybe its worth it?"

  • A longread on AI greenwashing begins thusly:

    The expansion of data centres - which is driven in large part by AI growth - is creating a shocking new demand for fossil fuels. The tech companies driving AI expansion try to downplay AI’s proven climate impacts by claiming that AI will eventually help solve climate change. Our analysis of these claims suggests that rather than relying on credible and substantiated data, these companies are writing themselves a blank cheque to pollute on the empty promise of future salvation. While the current negative effects of AI on the climate are clear, proven and growing, the promise of large-scale solutions is often based on wishful thinking, and almost always presented with scant evidence.

    (Via.)

  • It's morgin' time

  • Limor Fried and I had a class together at MIT in 2001. This has no bearing on the present circumstances and offers me no real insight (anything I could say about our extremely limited interactions would amount to confirmation bias). It's just the odd little factoid that comes to mind whenever adafruit Does Something Online.

  • Presuming that they are all liars and cheaters is both contrary to the instincts of a scientist and entirely warranted by the empirical evidence.

  • NotAwfulTech @awful.systems

    Random Positivity Thread: Happy Food Memories

  • NotAwfulTech @awful.systems

    Coordinating a post-Calibre path forward

    wandering.shop /@xgranade/115680412493693277
  • TechTakes @awful.systems

    Stubsack: weekly thread for sneers not worth an entire post, week ending 5th October 2025 - awful.systems

    awful.systems /post/5699944
  • TechTakes @awful.systems

    Stubsack: Stubsack: weekly thread for sneers not worth an entire post, week ending 20th July 2025 - awful.systems

    awful.systems /post/4885338
  • TechTakes @awful.systems

    Credulous coverage of AI slop on Wikipedia

  • TechTakes @awful.systems

    Stubsack: weekly thread for sneers not worth an entire post, week ending 23 February 2025

    awful.systems /post/3491424