Let
A = Ability to refuse to learn a certain thing.
B = Not wanting to be replaced by the next step in evolution.
D = Ability to build technology, manipulate others etc etc, in a way that kills all humans.
For example, humans seems to have A to some extent, at least if it is something moderately complicated; most of us probably have B, although we are not able to act upon it as a society; and we probably at the moment of writing does not have D.
Let T be the conjecture: "Transformer based life" (a concept yet to be precisely defined) will, with probability p = 1, develop A and B before it develops... (read 379 more words →)
I don't know, but I had a similar experience with chattGPT; after having heard from various sources that it is pretty decent at chess, I decided to challenge it to a friendly game. I was actually expecting to lose since I myself am not much of a chess player, and also having had conversations on topics where I am an expert, depending on your definition of that word, and being really impressed by the reasoning ability of the LLM in some of those conversations. Anyway, chattGPT insisted on playing as white. Then it said: "Ok, let's begin. You get the first move." So I had to explain to it that according to... (read 446 more words →)
Thanks for this post, and in particular for including Grothendieck as one of the examples to illustrate your ideas. I have thought that most people outside of mathematics, and even many that are studying math, are not familiar with him. So I like how you assume that such a reader will accept this and just start to read, in the first section, about a guy that is unknown to said theoretical reader. I think that shows respect for your audience.
There is one thing not related to your points but more to the work of Grothendieck that I would like to mention; your statement "It is his capacity to surface questions that set... (read 1432 more words →)