analyticskyle.bsky.social

analyticskyle.bsky.social

@analyticskyle.bsky.social

17 followers30 following55 posts

analyticskyle.bsky.social reposted

We can estimate the resource cost of solving the Erdos problem. The calculations below seem reasonable, so using the best public estimates we have, it took 0.6–6.3 kWh of electricity & 3–31L of water Equivalent to < 3 almonds worth of water & the electricity equivalent of 2-20 miles of EV driving

Ryan Briggs@ryancbriggs.net

Any idea how many cheeseburgers worth of water it took to solve this?

analyticskyle.bsky.social reposted

OpenAI's claim that this is a central conjecture in discrete geometry is not an exaggeration. This will I think be looked back on as the first time that AI solved a major mathematics problem (defined as a problem that all experts in some subfield had thought about). openai.com/index/model-...

openai.comAn OpenAI model has disproved a central conjecture in discrete geometryAn OpenAI model solved the 80-year-old unit distance problem, disproving a major conjecture in discrete geometry and marking a milestone in AI-driven mathematics.

It seems quite clear that AI will be at least partially responsible for major scientific advances in the future. People can decide what that means for them personally, but dismissing the technology as a "Stochastic Parrot" seems short sighted. openai.com/index/model-...

openai.comAn OpenAI model has disproved a central conjecture in discrete geometryAn OpenAI model solved the 80-year-old unit distance problem, disproving a major conjecture in discrete geometry and marking a milestone in AI-driven mathematics.

The distinction here is that Sora is a product, not a technology. Later, comparisons are made to MySpace and this isn't a bad analogy. MySpace died, but social media didn't. There WILL be winners and losers in the company/product space but that is true of any segment of the economy.

This post is unavailable.

This is economic non-sense, and I suspect that the NYT writer misquoted the professor. Hotel companies do not raise prices to "make up for lost time". Not because they don't want to. But because they can't. They are trying to maximize profit at each point in time.

The fact that they made less money last year or the year before is not consequential to the pricing decision today. They will choose the price that makes them the most money. If this weren't true, you'd expect them to lower prices in years following "Good Years". But that is nonsense.

You are up to date.