I think you mean beautiful green

This can be improved by using horizontal rectangles instead, à la Lebesgue. But measure theory didn't exist yet during Riemann's time and he was bussy revolutionising geometry or something

Clearly we need to completely stop rewarding “being the first to solve a problem” (this rush is completely idiotic) and transition to “write exposition in a clear and elegant way”. The question is now how to incentivize this!

*apparently four-dimensional space was already considered. Not that surprising, since space is R^3 and adding time gives you R^3 x R = R^4

Does this count as a new change in the map?

But what if it’s a Vitali set?

The through-socks-stinging bee

Could this be the scariest Trevor Henderson monster to date?

gonna be honest, I disagree with that second part. There is no misalignment between the outcome and initial purpose. The point of LLMs (at least those developed by companies like OpenAI and Anthropic), was *never* to aid humanity in research

yeah, i think i just have a lot more appreciation for movies that have A Take even if they don’t entirely work. i’d rather watch something bad that represents a vision than something that’s decent but clearly built by committee

I'm so anti-constructivist, I *only* accept non-constructive proofs

this especially worries me when it comes to math. I fear it may become the norm or a de facto requirement to use LLMs for anyone wanting to go into mathematics. And I just don't want to do that

for many reasons, but one is what I said before... working with it would be soul-sucking, I feel (2/2)