I thought I did terrible 5, but jev got 0 in a row. then the slopcoded app says "Jev has won 2,613 of 3,300 games, this one included."
Though if you need very quick answers obviously humans can't compete.
Actually on further thought after getting 15, if you've seen the exact problem before you can answer quickly, so the usefulness is diminished to problems that don't need to be 100% correct, need to be solved very quickly (even routing might not need to be this quick), problem form often changes, but is still general knowledge, and very low marginal benifet for 99% correctness over 50%
That puts the cart before the horse, in the past these prestigious degrees signaled elite status, they are the people who decide where capital flows, if they couldn't get a job they'd just make one. More likely people haven't wised up, they just stopped making hiring decisions, leaving it to AI.
Perhaps for data points in similar extremes, but there are definitely a good many theorems that show there is reason to weight extreme outliers more heavily. And practical experience using them as a signal to test for measurement errors etc.
>The problem with trusting AI to learn a complex subject, which I've tried multiple times, is it will always at some point confidently give you the wrong explanation for something important and you will have no way to detect it. Its quite frustrating and that realization might not come for hours or days and you've built lots of false mental models that can be hard to untangle.
This is an amazing problem to have! Often, preAI, I'd reject models flat out since they weren't even convincing on their face. There is value to this even if it's not correct. How long were people stuck with the aether? a few days or months is nothing.
You can see why in his own words. "my field of research" emphasis on "My". Humans are great at constructing exploitative systems were all but a few get the shaft. The machinist smashed their ivory tower. For people concern with mathematics, from Platonists to Constructionists AI is a great development, it's only bad for elitists. Except not even then since we are all in the same boat now but the water-level has risen greatly!
He means for normal people, sure if you go around assaulting people like you could in the unenlightened times you get more pressure. What you both mean by "pressure" is oversocialization you are just looking at 2 sides of the same coin. Well his point is more about people feeling uncared for, I doubt that drives people to suicide. One explaination is that is could this mental l strain could increase the liklihood for mental illness, but that's flat for men in the articles age bracket. You posit that people kill themselves because they have a tough life, again that isn't born out in the data. Indeed collecting data for this is akin to hitting a dartboard while drunk and skydiving and the board is 2 miles away.
The point of society you can increase "true freedom" by restricting people's ability to act arbitrarily, so called "naive freedom". If people can't accept that then they can go live in the woods (not anymore), the ocean, the moon? mars? or end it.
From time immemorial the winners shaped society what do you think happened to the losers? Just because we leave them alive now doesn't mean they can live in the new world.
Also "highest ever" among some specific arbitrary demographic isn't very meaningful enough to draw out anything beyond free association.
> "highest ever" among some specific arbitrary demographic isn't very meaningful
It's meaningful if you do actually happen to be of that demographic. It's no longer arbitrary then, sure, but I do care quite a lot if something bad is affecting men because I'm one of those.
Not only that, but many of the people I care most about in the world are men too ! probably a bit over half!
Also, how specific is "middle aged men"? thats a huge portion of society - I'd have understood your point if this was about like, people employed as painters in texas. But this has such a huge N, alongside a relatively unambiguous test (I trust reporting of these statistics more or less)
Though if you need very quick answers obviously humans can't compete.
Actually on further thought after getting 15, if you've seen the exact problem before you can answer quickly, so the usefulness is diminished to problems that don't need to be 100% correct, need to be solved very quickly (even routing might not need to be this quick), problem form often changes, but is still general knowledge, and very low marginal benifet for 99% correctness over 50%
reply