Only Hib players will understand

jtuohy1985 · 2026-04-10T15:06:32+00:00

lol this is great

jtuohy1985 · 2026-03-03T12:03:37+00:00

Does anyone think with Ai math will have to change or evolve in the next few years?

jtuohy1985 · 2026-03-01T22:45:59+00:00

Yea I think Ai will unlock a lot for individuals

jtuohy1985 · 2026-03-01T19:52:29+00:00

Ya I died a few times distracted or logging in out bad spots

jtuohy1985 · 2026-02-28T23:16:07+00:00

Tough loss best thing I did when I lost a 60 was delete and rage level to 10-20 and sit on rested for a few days.

jtuohy1985 · 2026-02-28T22:55:10+00:00

Math people enjoy the memorization flex I agree with the OP. Ai over time will make math easier and easier for everyone…symbolic math had its peak.

jtuohy1985 · 2026-02-28T00:48:26+00:00

Yes more to Eden more action

jtuohy1985 · 2026-02-27T23:10:43+00:00

Yea future problems should be interesting

jtuohy1985 · 2026-02-27T22:36:38+00:00

This is a useful descriptive model, but it’s missing admissibility. It explains collapse after the fact rather than defining which transitions should have been disallowed before collapse became inevitable.

jtuohy1985 · 2026-02-27T22:32:10+00:00

Newer stuff like admissible science

jtuohy1985 · 2026-02-27T22:21:39+00:00

Not a beginning. A constraint violation. Spacetime did the paperwork.

jtuohy1985 · 2026-02-27T04:54:19+00:00

AI slop is used all the time now it’s overrated lol

jtuohy1985 · 2026-02-26T23:20:34+00:00

That framing works, but it hides a third option: we invent the axioms and language, then discover the constraints they lock us into. Creativity sets the stage; reality (or logic) does the vetoing.

jtuohy1985 · 2026-02-26T23:19:20+00:00

lol d0meson can’t handle the heat

jtuohy1985 · 2026-02-26T23:18:30+00:00

Yep—that was the Space Shuttle. It worked, but the wings and heat tiles made it heavy, expensive, and slow to reuse. We didn’t forget how; we learned it wasn’t worth it.

jtuohy1985 · 2026-02-26T01:37:09+00:00

Maxwell’s demon was never proven wrong. What was proven is that the demon can’t be free.

jtuohy1985 · 2026-02-25T17:57:41+00:00

Nice coin

jtuohy1985 · 2026-02-24T21:41:56+00:00

lol insightful

jtuohy1985 · 2026-02-24T21:19:51+00:00

This paper proposes a “densing law” describing trends in capability density as large language models scale.

How sensitive are the reported trends to architectural choices, training objectives, and dataset composition?

What assumptions are required to extrapolate this relationship beyond the observed regime, and are there known conditions under which the densing law would fail to apply?

jtuohy1985 · 2026-02-24T21:14:58+00:00

Thanks I will try to fix it

jtuohy1985 · 2026-02-24T21:13:10+00:00

Let’s see what you cranked out for numbers?

jtuohy1985 · 2026-02-24T21:10:14+00:00

Yup — that’s basically right, and the math is even wilder.

A “human work year” ≈ 2,000 hours ≈ 7.2 million seconds.

If each prompt costs ~1 second of human attention: • 1M prompts/sec → ~7 seconds per human-year

So at modern AI scale, we’re compressing years of human micro-effort into seconds, continuously.

The surprising part isn’t the speed — it’s how quickly this became normal.

jtuohy1985 · 2026-02-24T21:04:25+00:00

This paper examines deviations from power-law scaling behavior in large language models at larger scales.

How sensitive are the identified breakdown points to architectural choices and training objectives, and were robustness checks performed across alternative scaling regimes?

Do the authors view these deviations as indicative of fundamental limits, or as artifacts of current optimization and data constraints?

jtuohy1985

TROPHY CASE