writing another blog post that'll end up being 10,000 words

if we really want to solve the male loneliness epidemic, there's nothing for it but to bring back whaling.

it's quite something

it seems like a throughline to a lot of these "the voters are genocidal/racist/transphobic so i ge- i mean have to be too" performances is that these people consider themselves to be separate from and superior to The Voters and maintaining and enforcing that self-conception is their top priority

It sure is talky! (In a good way. I liked it a lot.)

Did you see Blue Moon

You could just have reposted the actual post. It's here too. It's still stupid though

Here’s a random bit about an incidental character who, on the one hand, is very much of their time and impossible to imagine in academia today, but also on the other hand clearly born hopelessly too early, before the meme- and shitpost-industrial complex could have made full use of his huge talents.

Not with that attitude

if AI boosters were claiming, and I suppose some of them might be because god only knows what they won't say, "AI will be as God, revealing all and only truths", then yes: Gödel applies

"there are true statements that cannot be proven" is not limited to silicon

the argument was very much "proving mathematical statements can't be automated, therefore p". But proving mathematical statements can be automated, so we may fairly regard p as not yet established. Again, any argument starting from Gödel applies to mathematical activity generally

many proof assistants use dependently-typed languages that require the functions you write to terminate, and they will attempt to *prove* that the functions terminate. we know Turing that *in general* this is impossible, and they might reject valid programs. But "in general" doesn't mean "always"

If that meant that computers could not generate mathematical proofs, it would also mean that humans could not generate mathematical proofs. Mathematics is the domain of human activity that is *most concerned* with what is computable. Proof theory is automated!

here's a file proving (among other things) that ⅔ is less than 0.67, which is not exactly earthshaking but is a truth!

What do you mean by (or think he means by, I guess) "automate the process of proving mathematical truths"? automated theorem proving is absolutely a thing; proof assistants/formal systems will have theorem provers that can do quite a lot of heavy lifting

It's over for you bitches

truly, my reaction to this is not so much Nuzzi shouldn't express her authentic emotions as that Nuzzi isn't expressing and may not even be having authentic emotions; she at best doesn't understand herself and overuses imitations of expression bc she doesn't know what success would be

Word counts don't hit themselves