Abe

What I think about is not really relevant, it's a question of what will actually happen.

My worry is not that the experience itself of mathematics as poetry will be worse or better than the experience itself of mathematics as a vocation. My worry is that the community dynamics fostered by mathematics as poetry will be worse than the extremely healthy community dynamics fostered by mathematics as a vocation, and that this is the thing that will suck joy.

I agree with all of this. One thing that scares me about the "mathematics as poetry" world is the sociological effect of human beings no longer rolling up their sleeves and really doing mathematics as it is understood today. Mathematical culture is very special; despite some exceptions it is an unusually open, honest, kind world. I worry that this is driven by the objective and verifiable nature of mathematical progress, combined with a high barrier to entry and a real place for good taste. If the human part of mathematics becomes entirely subjective and aesthetic, I worry that it could turn into a popularity contest that would suck the joy out of the thing itself.

Certainly preference cascades and demographic change can explain some changes in public opinion, but I also think that people actually change their minds. Having lived through it, I'm pretty confident that the shift in public opinion on gay marriage was due at least in part to some people genuinely changing their minds, and even then penitence is rare to non-existent.

I think there are limits to how good one's values can get without facing one's past sins.

I don't think this is true, or at least I don't think it's obvious. When opinions change in Democratic societies, in my experience the generic stance is "That's how I always felt, I'm glad everyone else caught up." But clearly _someone_ must have changed their mind about gay marriage between 2005 and 2015. I don't think there's a limit on how far you can shift without penitence. I'm not sure that's how human psychology works.

If items are only available at "gouged" rates, then this will make them more expensive. That is, this tax will fall only on people in the emergency zone, and specifically those who are desperate enough to buy goods at these elevated costs. Since demand is very inelastic under these circumstances, the tax burden will fall almost entirely on the consumer.

Another approach might be to temporarily raise taxes everywhere except the emergency zone on these goods. For example, if bottled water falls under a temporary excise tax during a hurricane everywhere except the hurricane zone, that incentivizes sellers to bring bottled water to the hurricane victims.

I listen to his podcast semi-regularly, and this just seems like a pretty slippery description of his views. It's pretty obvious that he favors the United States taking a less aggressive stance toward China, for example in his views on the various protectionist measures that the United States has taken in the last ten years. He also seems to see more room for cooperation than anyone I would describe as a China hawk, and in this podcast he suggests that China could likely liberalize after Xi:

https://www.manifold1.com/episodes/molson-hart-china-and-amazon-up... (read more)

This argument seems to be a one by analogy. steam engine:industrial revolution::???:machine learning. But as you can see there's a term in the analogy I don't understand. Is ??? chatgpt? LLMs? Transformers? AlexNet? The internet? Digital computers? Something that hasn't yet been invented?

It should be pointed out that the original paper/press release describing GPT-4 explicitly says that they found that BIG-bench had contaminated their training data, and therefore excluded it as an evaluation. As far as I know there was no similar disclosure for claude or other models. See footnote 5 here: https://arxiv.org/abs/2303.08774v1

Leetcode questions are not selected for novelty. In fact, the best way to get a problem turned into a Leetcode question is to post it to Leetcode's discussion board and say someone asked you it in an interview at a big tech company. So it's still possible that some or even many these questions appear nearly verbatim in the training data.