it was true tho

argon doesn't trust me 😭

Over 400 academics in 30+ countries signed our open letter calling for immediate changes in AI development and deployment practices to ensure that cybersecurity incidents do not continue to occur, as future incidents will be far more damaging to our critical infrastructure.

i get why they do this (they want your data) but I absolutely hate it

Hey @jalman.bsky.social is no slouch either :) (He's coauthored most of the recent papers on this topic with Virginia -- they're both world experts in this area)

I'd love to see a venue/track for "the book" proofs. 1. New proofs of previously known theorems are strongly encouraged; 2. The bar for publication is very high: reviewers should think that the proof could not possibly be made any simpler. 6/6

You can see how after a few such AI-driven works that build on top of each other, entire solutions could become inscrutable. No individual paper may have committed a serious offense, but the obfuscation accumulates, even when there might have been a much more elegant solution. 5/n

In my experience, (current) AI models are not great at producing "human interpretable" or elegant solutions, even after de-slopifying. They've produced technical modifications on top of previous technical solutions, which get increasingly hard (for me?) to intuit. 4/n

But given the recent emphasis by the mathematical community on "human understanding," perhaps now's the time to revisit this focus for the things we already (think we) know? 3/n

Most of the focus on AI for math has been on producing new results. But surprisingly little on finding simpler or more elegant arguments for old results? I would love for folks to clean up the literature using these newfound superpowers. 1/n

based

Happy mid-autumn festival! 中秋节快乐! 🥮