Grabbing and giving back is a really funny way of looking at copying something. Pay for a copy or don't.

Try explaining to a five year old that the balloon animal you gave them is not free if they can make modifications and not share them back with you.

Which past... before it became a convenient stick to bash the scary AI with, nobody gave a crap about copyrighted works or intellectual property rights in general around here for damned sure, not ever.

All of a sudden everyone is a digital Karen crying "you need to pay for that" while perched on top their horde of pirated movies, music and audio books. Hey we should only have to pay for stuff if we really like it and the seller provides terms we like, and not if we weren't going to buy it anyway. Right .... isn't that how it goes? Please don't make me roll my eyes harder, this hurts.

... dominating the market ... is part of your definition of free?

Yeah, there's two main problems:

1) People entering the wrong fields. For example, medicine really needs workers, at all levels, but not enough people are going into it.

2) Certain manual labour fields, like field work and home construction, because... well, I think we all know why there's a shortage of workers in those fields.

Or let's put this another way. Show of hands - how many of you "spicy autocorrect" / "stochastic parrot" people had "AI will start mass-solving Erdos problems" on your forecast list a couple years back? Huh, none of you? Fascinating!

Take some time to reassess your priors. And while you do so, understand that, yes, they are doing logic / reasoning.

They weren't discovered by an LLM. They were known conjectures that were proven by an automated solving language that was linked to an LLM.

I'll take "Things That Didn't Happen For $200", Alex.

Only a handful of meaningful proofs have ever been done by automated formal theorem solvers (the Four Colour Theorem being the most noteworthy example - but its proof is so long that humans can't verify it). By contrast, AI tools have been solving Erdos problems en masse. The majority of them just bog-standard commercial models. In case you need help, the only ones on that list that were hybrid (AI / non-AI) in the actual solving phase are:

1) AlphaProof / DeepMind Prover Agent / AlphaProof Nexus
2) Aristotle (Harmonic)
3) Seed Prover / Seed Prover 1.5 (ByteDance)
4) AxiomProver (Axiom Math)

In each of the above, LLMs come up with the lemmas / strategies but then use Monte Carlo search ("brute force") or likewise to investigate what they came up with. These are a minority. In the "AI Standalone" category, these "hybrid" tools made up only ~20% of attempts and successful proofs. Hybrid tools actually made more of a contribution in the "AI Alongside Literature" (related literature found afterward) and even more of the "AI Building On Literature" (related literature known beforehand) categories, which is the opposite of what people like you expect.

And even with the hybrid tools, it's still the AI doing the heavy lifting when it comes to strategy. Non-AI theorem solvers, again, don't have a spectacular record for churning out novel proofs to unsolved problems. Tools like Lean are more about mathematical rigour - a passive environment that requires a driver (a human or AI) to feed it actual strategies, lemmas, and proof steps. And no, you cannot brute force "strategy" in the vast majority of cases, which is, again, why automated theorem solvers don't have much of a track record with unsolved mathematical problems.

Let's take a random example: the disproof of the unit distance conjecture. It was solved purely by a general purpose commercial GPT model, not custom-trained to mathematics, with no external tools. Read what the various mathematicians reviewing / commenting on it have to say (sections #3 and onward). Seriously, don't skip reading them, actually read them. This was one of Erdos's favourite problems. He mentioned it commonly in his lectures. Essentially every mathematician working in complex geometry has thought about this problem. The approach that the model came up with was highly novel approach, based on CM-fields and class field towers.

I know you don't want to accept this reality, but it is the reality, so you better improve your ability to accept it,. The field of mathematics is already doing so.

Dang, link didn't post.

Ah, good 'ol "Model Collapse" theory that people have been pounding on for years now, predicting an imminent collapse in model capabilities. How has that been working out for you?

Except what the US is actually facing, at least in the near term, is just the opposite, a worker shortage.

You can't pay royalties to the entire internet. That's not realistic.

What is practical are things like taxes to fund public benefits, or requirements of returning things to the commons (for example, open models).

Where in the article does it make that claim?

If you're talking about the implication in the headline, I took it as a brag about having a very large pipeline to mint new billionaires, possibly the largest. As in it doesn't matter. They're not wrong.

From the other end, being the destination for a bunch of rich people moving in doesn't really mean shit. My experience from the New England area is that being the place a bunch of rich people from out of state move to just fucks with property taxes and home prices. I mean they're moving there to get away from where they made their money keep more of what they have to themselves, that's sort of the point. I just don't think that's a controversial viewpoint from a place where rich people like to retire to, no matter what side of the aisle you're on.

The other party will promptly run on undoing it again. Is there a joke in there I'm missing, because it's really pretty sad.

Affordable Care Act required everyone working that can afford it to pay for health insurance, which is one way to lower insurance premiums - everyone pays in instead of waiting till something is wrong or they're older. Republicans gutted that part, but left in the parts that required dependent coverage for young adult children and maternity and prenatal care, preexisting conditions etc. That's good and all, but you still need healthy people paying in, insurance doesn't work if you wait until you need it to buy it. Republicans still want to keep the insurance middleman, but .. they don't really have any sort of plan past that, so they just fucked with ACA where they could, and stopped talking about it after .. how long has it been? I'm not sure what the plan is now, save money you poors, you're on your own? Bragging about the best healthcare in the world, well, shouldn't that be more expensive almost by definition then, so I guess the lower classes being unable to afford it was part of the plan all along? That's a sick joke man.

You're the one making the claim that modern frontier models still make this mistake (they don't), so how about you go to a frontier model, reproduce what you're claiming happens, and click the "share" button and post the link here?

Don't worry, I'll wait.

Your inability to reproduce the thing that you claim happens is duly noted.