I’ve been watching this space for a while and built my own puzzle with Cursor. Vibe coding speeds things up, but getting the idea, difficulty balance, and UI right is still tricky. Probably depends a lot on the type of puzzle (word-based vs. object placement, etc.).
Thanks! The difficulty is based on the number of steps taken by my solver to solve the puzzle using backtracking and force moves calculations. Humans make better guesses, so it is not just luck ;).
Thanks for the feedback, will look into it. I have too distinct interfaces for mobile and desktop so it could be that you are stuck with the desktop one that uses click (vs touch).
Stochastic calculus is required to derive closed formulas and approximations used to calibrate SDE models. Similarly to deep learning, the secret sauce lies in the training, less in the inference. The code used by banks is closed source, and the research papers are missing said secret sauce. Calibrating models in a production environment handling correlation, multi-curves, stochastic funding, discrete dividends, etc. is not a solved problem. Interest rate derivatives modeling heavily relies on change of measure, even when using simple models.
The comment above is probably from a bot. You do need an extensive understanding of stochastic calculus to maintain quant models code, let alone explain what it does to regulators.
Good point. On a serious note, I probably overreacted, sorry about that. I have been working as a derivatives quant for a decade and thought the claim that stochastic calculus was not used/useful was ridiculous.
How so? A human is more likely to use a hyphen, an AI an em dash. Same with quotes - a human is much more likely to use ", an AI “ and ”. Typography is a differentiating signal when it's used dis-proportionally more by one group than another.
Word processors (less of an issue for Internet comments, but worth keeping in mind) but more significantly iOS (at least) and I assume Android will just swap in an em dash where needed—it is automatic.
There is probably some signal, but be a good Bayesian; we have people saying “oh, this is a bot” when there’s a huge population of mobile users with smart keyboards that are the more likely cause.
Anyway, in general I find bot-hunting annoying. Comments should be handled as comments, if someone has made a bad argument, it should be taken down as a bad argument. If it was bot-generated, it is still there to mislead people. The advantage that bots have is that they have infinite patience and nothing better in their lives to do than argue, but there have always been people like that, so hopefully readers will be able to observe that persistence!=correctness.
I'm using a stock Android keyboard - it doesn't. Perhaps that's were our differing perspectives originate. I'm updating away from AI, and toward iPhone users.
EDIT: I plugged in my prior, hit rate and false alarm rates from before updating and found that my P(AI|fancy-em) = 0.09. After updating my false alarm rate, P(AI|fancy-em) now = 0.016.
People accusing comments they don’t agree with of being bots? Yes it has been happening for decades. Lots of folks are bad at arguing, so they make random accusations to distract from that fact.
Yes, it happens that some people create bots and have them post in these pages. They (some?) do not pass the "naïve Turing Test" though: there is one that tries to speak like an "inspiring lifecoach" and has zero juice squared. Check the shadowed posts around...
And on the other side, I have been accused a few times - writing outside expected canon (of form and content) can be sufficient.
So, bragging I will say, accusations hit both tails of the juice curve ;) .
Totally second this. I often mention this scandal when discussing pseudo sciences, along with Elisabeth Teissier case. Quite embarrassing for my country but surely a good laugh. Love that this ended on HN !
Unacceptable. Proper formatting is a prerequisite. It's not about being elitist - it's about readability and efficient communication. The equations in these "theses" are so badly formatted I would have taken off marks if an undergrad gave me something similar.
It's fine if you have a handful of equations in your text. But for a PhD in maths? Unacceptable.
Shameless plug: https://play7fold.com