Pouring one out for the local-news reporters who have to figure out what the fuck “timeless decision theory” could possibly mean.

The big claim is that R1 was trained on far less computing power than OpenAI’s models at a fraction of the cost.

And people believe this … why? I mean, shouldn’t the default assumption about anything anyone in AI says is that it’s a lie?

Altman: Mr. President, we must not allow a bullshit gap!

Musk: I have a plan… Mein Führer, I can walk!

I would appreciate this too, frankly. The rabbit hole is deep, and full of wankers.

This seems like an apt point to share Maxwell Neely-Cohen’s “Century-Scale Storage”.

Jim Propp once wrote,

I asked ChatGPT, the modern apotheosis of unjustified self-confidence, to prove that .999… is less than 1. Its reply began “Here is a proof that .999… is less than 1.” It then proceeded to show (using familiar arguments) that .999… is equal to 1, before majestically concluding “But our goal was to show that .999… is less than 1. Hence the proof is complete.” This reply, as an example of brazen mathematical non sequitur, can scarcely be improved upon.

brb, saving copies of physics and math books before they go offline

Michael Keaton bursts out of a grave It’s sneer time!

Apparently the whole thing was a prank?