Parity in computing is whether the count of 1s in a binary string is even or odd, e.g. '101' has two 1s => even parity (to output 0 for even parity, XOR all bits like 1^0^1 .. to output 1 for this, XOR that result with 1).

The parity problem (if I understand it correctly) sounds like trying to find out the minimum amount of data samples per input length a learning algorithm ought to need to figure out that a mapping between a binary input and a single bit output is equal to computing XOR parity and not something else (e.g. whether an integer is even/odd, or if there is a pattern in wannabe-random mapping, ...), and the conclusion seems to be that you need exponentially more samples for linearly longer input .. unless you can figure out from other clues that you need to calculate parity in which case you just implement parity for any input size and you don't need any additional sample data.

(FTR: I don't understand the math here, I am just pattern matching to the usual way this kind problems go)

The failure mode of the current policy sounds to me like "pay for your own lesson to feel less motivated to do it again" while the failure mode of this proposal would be "one of the casinos might maybe help you cheat the system which will feel even more exciting" - almost as if the people who made the current policy knew what they were doing to set aligned incentives 🤔

Focus On Image Generators

How about audio? Is the speech-to-text domain as "close to the metal" as possible to deserve focus too or did people hit roadblocks that made image generators more attractive? If the latter, where can I read about the lessons learned, please?

What if you tried to figure out a way to understand the "canonical cliffness" and design a new line of equipment that could be tailored to fit any "slope"... Which cliff would you test first? 🤔

IMO

in my opinion, the acronym for the international math olympiad deserves to be spelled out here

Evolution isn't just a biological process; it's a universal optimization algorithm that applies to any type of entity

Since you don't talk about the other 3 forces of biological evolution, or about "time evolution" concept in physics...

And since the examples seem to focus on directional selection (and not on other types of selection), and also only on short-term effect illustrations, while in fact natural selection explains most aspects of biological evolution, it's the strongest long-term force, not the weakest one (anti-cancer mechanisms and why viruses don't usualy kill theit host are also well explained by natural selection even if not listed as examples here, evolution by natural selection is the thing that well explains ALL of those billions of years of biology in the real world - including cooperation, not just competition)...

Would it be fair to say that you use "evolution" only by analogy, not trying to build a rigorous causal relationship between what we know of biology and what we observe in sociology? There is no theory of the business cycle because of allele frequency, right?!?

If anyone here might enjoy a dystopian fiction about a world where the formal proofs will work pretty well, I wrote Unnatural abstractions

Thank you for the engagement, but "to and fro" is a real expression, not a typo (and I'm keeping it).. it's used slightly unorthodoxly here, but it sounded right to my ear, so it survived editing ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

I tried to be use the technobabble in a way that's usefully wrong, so please also let me know if someone gets inspired by this short story.

I am not making predictions about the future, only commenting on the present - if you notice any factual error from that point of view, feel free to speak up, but as far as the doominess spectrum goes, it's supposed to be both too dystopian and too optimistic at the same time.

And if someone wants to fix a typo or a grammo, I'd welcome a pull request (but no commas shall be harmed in the process). 🙏

Let me practice the volatile kidness here ... as a European, do I understand it correctly that this advice is targeted for US audience? Or am I the only person to whom it sounds a bit fake?