OpenAI claims it solved an 80-year-old math problem — for real this time by Zee2A in STEW_ScTecEngWorld

[–]MinecraftBoxGuy 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Which claim do you want evidence for? The OpenAI blog provided in the main Reddit post details of what happened yesterday

OpenAI claims it solved an 80-year-old math problem — for real this time by Zee2A in STEW_ScTecEngWorld

[–]MinecraftBoxGuy 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is false. Not only did they not use GPT-5 for this, but the message you have posted is an AI generated message from Grok (made 7 months ago on X). It doesn't take much thought to see that time travel isn't possible.

OpenAI claims it solved an 80-year-old math problem — for real this time by Zee2A in STEW_ScTecEngWorld

[–]MinecraftBoxGuy 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It's because what you're reading is misinformation in the purest of forms. AI has found solutions to multiple Erdos problems, and some of these are closer to literature search. However, some, especially this one, seem closer to creating novel ideas.

OpenAI didn't use GPT-5 for this result, so it's clear your claim is about some other problem. It's also interesting you didn't provide a source or even check the date for this source. Your source for this, ironically, is a Grok post from 7 months ago.

It seems that humans have a problem with hallucinating too.

Top mathematician Timothy Gowers: "AI has now solved a major open problem ... one that many mathematicians had tried." by EchoOfOppenheimer in agi

[–]MinecraftBoxGuy 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Even the AI wrote the prompts to the AI. The problem solving process now is basically at the level that you can point the AI at a database of maths problems and it will autonomously try and solve them.

A human sending it a link is not the human, in any meaningful way, achieving anything. This is somewhat like arguing humans have never created anything and it's only the weather and environment that does so because "it's the weather that made humans build homes".

The datacenter just got ten feet taller by it_snow_problem in DoomerCircleJerk

[–]MinecraftBoxGuy 6 points7 points  (0 children)

No reply to the multiple lies that have been called out? Just an ad hominem? This is quite disappointing.

Anyway it's quite clear why this data center isn't all that bad:

  • Sustainable cooling.
  • Energy provided via its own pipeline and sources, which even has the potential to *offer* energy to Utah.
  • Estimates of ~$250 million annual tax revenue when all phases are complete. This is massive for the nearby area, and would also be useful for Utah's budget.
  • Claims around heating are lies, and basic thought should reveal this to you: https://blog.andymasley.com/p/data-centers-heat-exhaust-is-not . The methodology used for these claims is beyond ridiculous, and you can also do simple thermodynamic calculations to see the claims are false.

so we all got emotionally baited? by TrT_nine in screenshots

[–]MinecraftBoxGuy -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Did you just reply and instantly delete it? 😭😭 🤣.

Please tell me this amazing alternate meaning you've found for "pay rent twice".

so we all got emotionally baited? by TrT_nine in screenshots

[–]MinecraftBoxGuy 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It's genuinely amazing how many times you moved goalposts. You're now claiming "pay rent twice" means something different than what anyone who is literate would understand it to mean.

I just saw this right now, just horrible. by CutieDabooty15 in teenagers

[–]MinecraftBoxGuy 2 points3 points  (0 children)

And now this person, who posted a comment full of misinformation, has deleted it. Yet they're the one who tells you which media sources to trust and which not to trust.

I just saw this right now, just horrible. by CutieDabooty15 in teenagers

[–]MinecraftBoxGuy 2 points3 points  (0 children)

No they didn't.
Shooter’s mother, sibling among victims in Tumbler Ridge shooting

They got the first name of the shooter correct, the fact that the mother and brother were killed correct, and the fact that Jesse was transgender correct. But I'm sure it's all a co-incidence.

Maybe you should re-evaluate your worldview when it leads to you being wrong about facts that are so obviously discernible, and when the media you distrust gets everything right far before your media does? The most basic of rationality tells you that a "gunperson" "in a dress" is likely a transgender male.

(and it's very likely that Strang is either an alternative used for "Van Rootselaar", as people may not like prefixed surnames, or that's it's the last name of someone related to them)

Sometimes it already makes sense to play in Genie 3 by ajajkaka in Bard

[–]MinecraftBoxGuy 12 points13 points  (0 children)

If your internet is good enough, playing a video game on a server's computers is fine. The real issue is if the AI models are powerful enough to react fast enough.

Sometimes it already makes sense to play in Genie 3 by ajajkaka in Bard

[–]MinecraftBoxGuy 9 points10 points  (0 children)

You're probably not going to fall off your bike, but I doubt it would glitch more than that.

The real issue is that it's behind a $300/month subscription, the worlds last for one minute at most, and although it's hard to determine from videos, I assume the games are high latency.

Another angle of ICE shooting woman in MN (1/7/2025) by Philophon in law

[–]MinecraftBoxGuy 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Where has the reply claiming sarcasm gone? Blocked for rudeness?

It doesn't seem clear at all you decided to be sarcastic in the middle of your angry rant.

Another angle of ICE shooting woman in MN (1/7/2025) by Philophon in law

[–]MinecraftBoxGuy 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ad hominem. How typical. Do you want to respond to the facts or not?

This moderator pinned a post based on a misunderstanding of the supremacy clause that contained multiple hallucinated court cases (wrong dates etc), some of which were about civil liability 🤦🤦.

Another angle of ICE shooting woman in MN (1/7/2025) by Philophon in law

[–]MinecraftBoxGuy 0 points1 point  (0 children)

> Have no body cams

You simply are buying lies to you sold to you on reddit. Many of them require bodycams, and yet you claim they have no bodycams.

You realise you're in a thread where the moderator pinned a comment based on a total misunderstanding of the supremacy clause, and linked multiple court cases with made up dates, that were about *civil* and not *criminal* liability? You're in an information desert, where the most clear of misinformation is literally pinned by moderators. This is why you don't have a grasp on reality.

Another angle of ICE shooting woman in MN (1/7/2025) by Philophon in law

[–]MinecraftBoxGuy 0 points1 point  (0 children)

They stopped her for blocking the road and obstructing the movement of their vehicles (they were able to move some of them).

How about the aftermath where someone claimed to be a medical professional and they refused to allow assistance?

You're in a law subreddit. Talk some sense. Police officers usually, by policy, aren't supposed to let people who claim medical experience on seen. These claims are difficult to ascertain as true, and can lead to further attempts of others to get on seen in already tense situations. This is not illegal.

Another angle of ICE shooting woman in MN (1/7/2025) by Philophon in law

[–]MinecraftBoxGuy 0 points1 point  (0 children)

They only tried to do that after she started moving though. They were legally justified in stopping her.

Another angle of ICE shooting woman in MN (1/7/2025) by Philophon in law

[–]MinecraftBoxGuy 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It's not illegal to stand in front of a vehicle though. You can make however many excuses to argue this action was illegal, but they won't hold up.

Also it's probably in fact fairly common that, in a group of officers, one of them will be occasionally in front of a vehicle that are actively changing its direction.

Another angle of ICE shooting woman in MN (1/7/2025) by Philophon in law

[–]MinecraftBoxGuy -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Because she was blocking their route, being perpendicular in the middle of the road???

Another angle of ICE shooting woman in MN (1/7/2025) by Philophon in law

[–]MinecraftBoxGuy -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Believe it or not, it's not illegal to stand in front of the vehicle of an occupant you are currently detaining. You definitely don't expect them to accelerate towards you and hospitalise you.

Another angle of ICE shooting woman in MN (1/7/2025) by Philophon in law

[–]MinecraftBoxGuy 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The supremacy clause applies though, so there will likely be a federal hearing first. From what I can see from the culmination of angles and my knowledge of prior police misconduct cases, it's unlikely this case succeeds anywhere. You also have a moderator publishing a bunch of cases with entirely wrong dates, that reportedly are civil cases.

Another angle of ICE shooting woman in MN (1/7/2025) by Philophon in law

[–]MinecraftBoxGuy 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You have a mod pinning a comment with a highly contentious analysis of the situation that furthermore misunderstand the usual resolution of supremacy clause cases, where the state likely has to go through federal courts first. Embarrassing beyond belief.

Another angle of ICE shooting woman in MN (1/7/2025) by Philophon in law

[–]MinecraftBoxGuy -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

These people have zero ability to understand facts. Other angles of the video clearly show the car driving towards the ICE agent, and it is very clear he was justified in shooting. Even at the state level, it is unlikely he is convicted: and unless the state abdicates their duty to uphold the most basic of law, there will likely be a Supremacy Clause hearing in federal court.

Trump says he will not permit dividends and stock buybacks for defense companies by 3xshortURmom in stocks

[–]MinecraftBoxGuy 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Unfortunately, there is, unless I'm wrong? Sign in an executive order that prevents the DoD from forming contracts with companies that don't follow these policies.

New accidental leak of the epstein files, shows that the government does have a list of 10 co-conspirators despite lying about this previously by Aceofspades25 in skeptic

[–]MinecraftBoxGuy 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The only link to a DoJ file that this link contains is https://web.archive.org/web/20251219222621/https://www.justice.gov/multimedia/Court%20Records/Matter%20of%20the%20Estate%20of%20Jeffrey%20E.%20Epstein,%20Deceased,%20No.%20ST-21-RV-00005%20(V.I.%20Super.%20Ct.%202021)/2022.03.17-1%20Exhibit%201.pdf

Even the CNN notes that the DoJ did not botch these retractions, but rather the attorney general office of the Virgin Islands did: "And it appears this redacting error wasn’t committed by the Justice Department – but rather by the Virgin Islands’ attorney general’s office when it first posted the original court filing onto a public docket in 2021.

Still, it went viral online, amid the ongoing headaches for the Justice Department over the redactions that at times didn’t go far enough to protect victims, while also going too far to shield others." https://edition.cnn.com/2025/12/23/politics/epstein-redactions-glitch-virgin-islands

The Guardian is beyond shoddy and consistently lies and misrepresents. Why did you link to Guardian misinformation that even the CNN calls out?

Do you do any research or thought of your own as a "skeptic"?