skybrian's recent activity
-
Comment on Where do we go from here? (Regarding AI) in ~tech
-
Comment on A beginning for mathematics in ~science
skybrian LinkFrom the article: [...] [...] [...] [...]From the article:
Here I want to lay out, instead, a positive vision of the future of mathematics, and the human practice of mathematics. I claim we can deepen human understanding even as the production of interesting mathematics becomes less dependent on it.
[...]
In the course of this change, we will have to decide what to hold on to and what to throw away. Some things I would like to preserve: learning seminars; serendipitous conversations that spark an idea; students knocking on a professor’s door to chat about math. A robust community learning exciting new mathematics. Thousands of people that, together, slowly start to resolve their confusion.
I worry that much of what has been written on this topic, including some of my own past writing, focuses too much on trying to preserve the precise shape of the institutions of academic mathematics, rather than our values. How can we preserve the journal and peer review system?5 How can we protect the arXiv? How can we keep our role as gatekeepers? If you have internalized the fact that existing AI systems can produce relatively high quality results for the marginal cost of a few dollars, the idea that any semblance of the current equilibrium can survive what’s coming is absurd.
[...]
Before I propose some relatively concrete steps we can take, let me remark on what we’re trying to protect mathematics from. There is a lot of anger at AI labs, and certain individuals at those labs. But whatever our judgment of the labs, we need a plan that does not depend on AI capabilities disappearing. The basic issue is not the labs’ behavior, ethical or not.6 It’s the technology itself. I think there is some belief that the labs will “move on” from math next year, be nationalized or broken up, or that a financial bubble will pop, somehow returning things to normal, or… But there is no way our institutions can survive unchanged when anyone with a laptop and a few hundred dollars can generate what would have been an Annals paper last year. AI does not care if you are anti-AI.
[...]
In my view we should welcome interesting mathematical results regardless of provenance. But our institutions have historically relied on the same signal to indicate both mathematical progress and mathematical expertise. These now must be distinguished.
I propose the following reconceptualization of the goal of a mathematics PhD: to become a world expert on some interesting, deep topic, and to be able to convey that interest and understanding to others. Part of operationalizing this might be a thesis, but the degree would be awarded primarily on the basis of a rigorous defense, in which the student explains the topic to their examiners until they are satisfied. While we might require the topic to be original, its provenance—AI or not—is irrelevant.8
How different would this look from current PhDs? I think students would still meet with an advisor, who might suggest a topic. That topic could be explored with AI assistance, or not, but the student would be responsible for understanding it; it might be much more open-ended and larger than the typical PhD is currently. The student would be trained to ask interesting questions and try to resolve them, by whatever means. To keep students on track, there might be regular meetings in which the student is asked to independently work through an unfamiliar example, apply a technique in a new case, etc.
The allocative aspects of our job (hiring, graduate admissions, etc.) are in dire need of reform if we want to retain human mathematical expertise. Broadly speaking I think we should focus on rewarding skill in the parts of our jobs that cannot be automated: the internal (e.g. understanding mathematics) and social-relational parts, and operationalizations that hew as closely to those aspects of the profession as possible. For example, talks and sustained mathematical discussion now demonstrate understanding much better than papers. Once AI systems improve at exposition and “digestion,” this will be even more the case. We already interview faculty hires; we must now do the same for graduate admissions.
I think we should try to foster a robust seminar culture in which speakers are expected to explain their topic to the audience’s satisfaction. Much has been written recently (by myself among others) about the fact that we are primarily interested in understanding, not merely the truth value of mathematical statements. If that is the case, let us make sure we actually understand each other.
[...]
A student will be confused. They will knock on their professor’s door. Maybe the two of them will ask a model for help, or maybe not, but first they might spend some time at the blackboard thinking through the question. And the model might give them a beautiful explanation, but we all know that’s not enough; no one can understand mathematics for us. We have got to do the work.
-
A beginning for mathematics
3 votes -
Comment on Canada's oil windfall may yet wipe out its losses from tariffs in ~finance
skybrian Link ParentPolls are looking good for Democrats. Of course, they could be wrong, but I wouldn't lose hope yet.Polls are looking good for Democrats. Of course, they could be wrong, but I wouldn't lose hope yet.
-
Comment on Canada's oil windfall may yet wipe out its losses from tariffs in ~finance
skybrian Link ParentHe can't do it himself. The question is, who would he order to make the arrests and would they actually go along with it?He can't do it himself. The question is, who would he order to make the arrests and would they actually go along with it?
-
Comment on Weekly US politics news and updates thread - week of September 14 in ~society
skybrian Link ParentI think we need some kind of organization to regulate the AI industry and it looks like it's going to be the AI industry itself by default. That is, assuming they're allowed to form an...I think we need some kind of organization to regulate the AI industry and it looks like it's going to be the AI industry itself by default. That is, assuming they're allowed to form an organization.
I wouldn't trust an AI industry organization very far, but they're still less likely to screw it up than the Trump administration. It would be better than nothing.
The sad part is, who would represent ordinary people's interests in such an organization, if not governments?
-
Comment on Canada's oil windfall may yet wipe out its losses from tariffs in ~finance
skybrian Link ParentThat would be unprecedented and cause a constitutional crisis.That would be unprecedented and cause a constitutional crisis.
-
Comment on Canada's oil windfall may yet wipe out its losses from tariffs in ~finance
skybrian LinkFrom the article: [...] [...] [...] [...] [...] [...]From the article:
While Canadians are also feeling the impact of fluctuating oil prices — both at the pump and as it gets absorbed into shipping costs — the windfall from those profits could boost the overall economy enough to offset the cost of Trump's tariffs, with some provincial governments even projecting a turnaround on their deficits.
[...]
Economist Jim Stanford, director of the Centre for Future Work in Vancouver, estimates that the second quarter after-tax profits of the whole industry, upstream and downstream, doubled those of its first quarter, to come in at about $23 billion. (Of course, while Americans paid for most of that windfall, Canadian consumers also had to pay more at the pump.)
[...]
Alberta has already ridden the Iran war's oil bonanza to a complete reversal of its financial fortunes, moving from a projected $9.4-billion deficit to a $2-billion surplus.
Newfoundland and Labrador was projecting a $668-million deficit this year. This week, Finance Minister Craig Pardy told CBC News "we're looking at $500 million plus to our coffers as a result of the upswing in oil," bringing the province much closer to balance. Prices now look set to remain well above the province's budget estimate of $79 US per barrel for some time.
[...]
The federal government stands to benefit, too, mostly through corporate and personal income taxes. Tyler Meredith, former economic advisor to the Trudeau government, told CBC News that every $10 increase in the price of a barrel of oil translates into about $2 billion of additional revenue for the federal government — "a pretty substantial benefit."
[...]
U.S. tariffs affect about $28 billion worth of goods, so at first glance the oil windfall appears inadequate to compensate for tariff losses. But some tariffed goods will continue to trade, because U.S. buyers need them and lack alternatives. Other goods will find different markets, either in Canada or abroad.
[...]
Offshore oil production in Newfoundland and Labrador is already up about 25 per cent this year.
[...]
Already, U.S. tariffs fall much more heavily on manufacturing provinces such as Ontario, Quebec and British Columbia than they do on Alberta and Saskatchewan.
Higher prices will put even more pressure on industries that consume a lot of energy, such as manufacturing and transportation. High energy prices also tend to spill over into inflation in food and consumer goods, at a time when many Canadian families are already feeling stretched to make ends meet.
But high oil prices should also relieve downward pressure on the Canadian dollar, allowing for cheaper imports, which can partly counteract inflationary pressure on the cost of living.
-
Canada's oil windfall may yet wipe out its losses from tariffs
22 votes -
Comment on Saudi oil exports face heightened threats after attacks on pipeline in ~society
skybrian LinkFrom the article: [...] [...] [...] [...] [...]From the article:
On Friday, Houthi militants backed by Iran expanded their control of the Red Sea, threatening a critical route for Persian Gulf crude. That left the region with few alternatives, since shipping traffic through the Strait of Hormuz — once the world’s primary oil transit point — remains significantly constrained and far below what it was before the war.
And oil exports from Saudi Arabia, long the most important producer in the Middle East, plunged last month to their lowest point in at least 13 years.
The U.S. Navy has been able to keep oil flowing out of the Strait of Hormuz on sea paths close to the coast of Oman, the opposite side from Iran. But that has required an extensive and dangerous operation.
For shipping companies, the once routine operation of navigating the strait has become a high-risk endeavor. At least 23 ships were hit in the waterway near Oman in July and August. Since the war began at the end of February, at least 22 sailors have been killed in the Middle East.
[...]
Oil prices on Friday briefly topped $108 per barrel after escalating attacks from the Iranian-backed Houthi militia. That is roughly 50 percent above prewar levels. Average U.S. gasoline prices have climbed above $4 a gallon — over $1 more than they were a year ago. Also on Friday, the average cost of diesel, a staple fuel for trucking, farming and industry, topped $6 a gallon in the United States.
[...]
On Friday, Houthi rebel groups gained control of the strategic Red Sea port city of Mokha in Yemen, pushing out forces allied with the Yemeni government, which is backed by Saudi Arabia. Just days earlier, the Houthis injured 73 civilians and hit energy facilities in the southern part of Saudi Arabia.
[...]
The Saudi Energy Ministry said on Friday that its East-West Pipeline, the conduit it had been using instead of the Strait of Hormuz, had been “targeted multiple times” by attacks the day before and had been shut down as a “precautionary measure.”
[...]
In the past week, only two Saudi Arabian cargoes passed through the Bab al-Mandab Strait out of the Red Sea, according to Kpler, a maritime data firm.
Saudi Arabia has another Red Sea option to export oil — sending it north though a pipeline near the Suez Canal. But that route through the Mediterranean is costlier and adds weeks to the voyage to Asia, where most of the kingdom’s customers are.
[...]
Just in the past week, U.S. forces have disabled or destroyed at least eight Iranian tankers, she said, and Iran has retaliated with deadly attacks against vessels passing through the strait near Oman. The intensifying attacks are causing shipowners, even ones with a high appetite for risk, to hold off on braving the region.
-
Saudi oil exports face heightened threats after attacks on pipeline
11 votes -
Comment on OpenAI agents attacked RubyGems back in May in ~comp
skybrian Link ParentThat's oversimplifying the situation. LLM capabilities are improving. It's possible that they thought AI would eventually be a threat, while also underestimating its current capabilities.That's oversimplifying the situation. LLM capabilities are improving. It's possible that they thought AI would eventually be a threat, while also underestimating its current capabilities.
-
Comment on Where do we go from here? (Regarding AI) in ~tech
skybrian Link ParentThere are also many tasks that some humans can do but others can't. If we're talking about work, physical capabilities are sometimes relevant. I'm not sure what the definition of "intelligence"...There are also many tasks that some humans can do but others can't. If we're talking about work, physical capabilities are sometimes relevant.
I'm not sure what the definition of "intelligence" has to do with it? Intelligence isn't everything.
-
Comment on OpenAI agents attacked RubyGems back in May in ~comp
skybrian Link ParentThey are doing a lot more monitoring now. Apparently they underestimated the problem.They are doing a lot more monitoring now. Apparently they underestimated the problem.
-
Comment on Anthropic's Dario Amodei calls for AI oversight, joined by Sam Altman and Elon Musk in ~tech
skybrian Link Parent“Pacing” isn’t a development freeze. They propose slowing down a bit compared to how fast they could move, not stopping.“Pacing” isn’t a development freeze. They propose slowing down a bit compared to how fast they could move, not stopping.
-
Comment on Nvidia is the central bank of AI in ~finance
skybrian Link ParentNVIDIA inventory apparently turns over at about 3x a year, which is lower than before but it doesn’t seem that bad?NVIDIA inventory apparently turns over at about 3x a year, which is lower than before but it doesn’t seem that bad?
-
Comment on Where do we go from here? (Regarding AI) in ~tech
skybrian Link ParentOn the Internet, maybe, but an LLM is not a robot, and robots have a long way to go.On the Internet, maybe, but an LLM is not a robot, and robots have a long way to go.
-
Comment on Anthropic's Dario Amodei calls for AI oversight, joined by Sam Altman and Elon Musk in ~tech
skybrian Link ParentIt seems like they can't slow down too much or it will let their competitors catch up. So it doesn't sound much like a moat? If it ever got to the point where they're all about equally...It seems like they can't slow down too much or it will let their competitors catch up. So it doesn't sound much like a moat?
If it ever got to the point where they're all about equally intelligent, however that is measured, they could still compete on latency or price or something else that their customers want.
-
Comment on Nvidia is the central bank of AI in ~finance
skybrian Linkhttps://archive.ph/kt50V From the article: [...] [...] [...]From the article:
It is not just chipmaking that has spurred Nvidia’s stunning growth, however. Its boss, Jensen Huang, has also resorted to financial engineering to boost demand for its wares. In mid-August, for example, Nvidia agreed to provide a backstop worth up to $105bn for a vast data centre in Ohio that will use lots of its chips. A week earlier it had revealed plans to mobilise more than $500bn of investment in AI infrastructure with the help of six big Wall Street firms, by guaranteeing the value of the equipment it sells to such projects. It may underwrite as much as a quarter of the cost of some investments. In July Nvidia helped some customers finance big data centres in another way, by promising to top up their income if it misses set targets.
Companies often lend to their customers: think of the financing arms of carmakers, for example. Mr Huang argues that Nvidia is simply helping to unlock investment for perfectly viable projects that might otherwise struggle to borrow enough at the right price. But to critics, these deals carry more than a whiff of the dotcom boom of the late 1990s, when telecom-equipment-makers such as Cisco and Lucent lent billions of dollars to telecoms providers that bought their gear. When demand for the telecom firms’ services fell short, some of them collapsed, landing Cisco and Lucent with big losses.
As Jay Goldberg of Seaport Research Partners, a firm of analysts, puts it, Nvidia is walking a fine line between “enabling demand” and “creating it”. He does not yet think Nvidia has crossed that line, although it is “getting pretty close”. Others are more sceptical still, including Michael Burry, an investor who made a fortune betting against the mortgage-backed securities that precipitated the financial crisis of 2007-09. He and others are asking what might happen if demand for AI chips grows more slowly than expected, supply increases and prices fall, which would not only reduce Nvidia’s own profits but potentially also generate losses on its lavish support for its customers.
[...]
The question is pertinent because Nvidia’s financial commitments are huge and growing fast. Over the past three years it has pledged over $70bn in investment in startups and offered $300bn in financial support to its customers. Some have taken to calling Nvidia the “central bank of AI”, because it plays so pivotal a role in financing the industry. That will indeed, as Mr Huang argues, help the industry grow—but it also carries risks.
Nvidia’s financial engineering is partly a response to its biggest customers’ transformation into rivals. “Hyperscalers”, tech giants such as Amazon, Google, Meta and Microsoft, account for roughly half of Nvidia’s revenue. This year they are projected to invest around $800bn, largely on AI infrastructure. But most of them have begun designing their own chips, which puts their future purchases from Nvidia in doubt.
For the hyperscalers, these custom chips are much cheaper, costing between a fifth and a third as much as Nvidia’s. They can also perform some tasks better, because the hyperscalers can tailor them to their own software. Worse, from Nvidia’s point of view, a few of the tech giants are not simply developing chips for their own use, but also marketing them to others. Google, for example, has sold some specialised processors to Anthropic, a big, free-standing AI lab. Amazon also expects its custom-chip business to become a sizeable source of revenue. Bloomberg Intelligence, a data provider, predicts that custom chips will gradually eat into Nvidia’s sales, accounting for about 50% of the market for processors used in AI by the end of the decade, up from roughly 40% this year.
[...]
Underpinning this web of obligations are two fundamental assumptions: that Nvidia’s chips will retain their value and that demand for compute will continue to grow at a rapid pace. Neither is assured.
[...]
Nvidia will almost certainly not end up paying anything close to the full amount of its guarantees. Its commitments are spread over many years so could not come due all at once. Its proposed backstop for OpenAI’s data centre, for example, runs for 20 years, starting in 2028. If OpenAI stopped paying the lease, Nvidia could find another tenant, vastly diminishing its exposure.
What is more, Nvidia’s own finances are strong enough to weather these liabilities. Morgan Stanley, an investment bank, reckons Nvidia’s “all-in” debt will rise from $53bn early next year to $200bn by the beginning of 2029 as guarantees come into effect. But that is offset by a stash of cash and liquid securities currently worth $99bn, and a business that will generate about $200bn in cash this year. Only a cataclysmic downturn that caused all Nvidia’s guarantees to come due and its profits to evaporate almost entirely would imperil the company—as things stand.
The picture may change, however, if Nvidia’s commitments keep growing. Andy Li of CreditSights, a financial-research firm, worries that it will keep “pushing the pedal” until “something breaks”. SemiAnalysis estimates that Nvidia takes on roughly $5.9bn of guarantees for every 100 megawatts of data-centre capacity covered by its neocloud backstop programme. If it adds more such guarantees, SemiAnalysis reckons its exposure could reach $175bn by the end of 2028 from this initiative alone.
-
Nvidia is the central bank of AI
15 votes
They don't need to will vulnerabilities into existence. It's going to be quite awhile before all current software vulnerabilities have been fixed.
Or perhaps never, if you include social engineering as a vulnerability.