bitsens @bitsens

@TheEconomist @zannymb @Alice_Weidel Why can’t they make their podcast free like everyone else

@Starlink 100mbs isn’t fast

Claude has discovered a previously unknown enzyme system hidden in the DNA of bacteriophages. Beside the enzyme’s gene sits a long array of repeating DNA—a structure that looks somewhat similar to CRISPR. We don’t yet understand what this system does, but only a handful of known systems share its features, and all of them are able to cut, copy, and paste DNA. Historically, the discovery of such programmable systems has helped revolutionize medicine. CRISPR, for instance, is now the foundation of genetic medicines. But it will take much more work to learn what this system does, and whether it can be put to similar use. Read more: anthropic.com/news/claude-di…

@BrianRoemmele @grok @grok is 4.7 out yet

@faruk_parhat @NickBuilds11 It’s a bin with wheels and some fancy green decor

@elonmusk What about @Fortnite?

@elonmusk @itslueul Opus 5? Even with spacex data? That’s massively anticlimactic 😔

That Tesla take off is an absolute joke

Bulvar Medya @Bulvarpress

a month ago

Tesla ve McLaren, kısa mesafe kalkış yarışı yaptı:

959 2K 76K 44.0M 9K

@farzyness Grok 4.7 needs a few more days to cook. We might have penalized response length too much (or something) in RL, as it still gives up on hard tasks (that it can do!) too early and isn’t yet sufficiently rigorous in checking its work.

unfortunately i contacted them on the night of wednesday, september 2nd making the following points 1. i had intel they had information about math work i was doing and a few days before they had spun up a group to try to compete. 2. i emphasized and reemphasized mine was a strictly personal mathematical collaboration 3. that this was a collaboration that had been going on for a year 4. that in my personal collaboration we were happy users of codex as well as obviously claude (and i later complimented astra explicitly after it came out for its help, and reassured i would obviously be sprinkling acknowledgments for it, previous models, and codex liberally in the writeups) 5. that it would look terrible if openai were competing against mathematician consumers, and my collaborator (Tristan) wanted to email about this explicitly 6. that i expected none but in the worst case intended to refuse marketing around the result we were working towards, being the fruit of a personal external academic collaboration, and wanted to express this because i figured worries about such marketing by their leadership was why a team was spun up to extraordinarily directly compete. sebastien and i have in the past months had our fun pushing each other on twitter, but as i process it all i keep feeling bad about Tristan. 1. neither of us could sleep Sunday night, so we went on a walk around the city. i finally asked him why fluids, and he told me it was the navier-stokes problem. he told me parts of the story about his classic nonuniqueness result with Vicol i hadn’t heard yet, and also about how he too grew up writing shaders as a kid and then switched to math 2. tristan is a mathematician’s mathematician. he kept rock solid to his principles during the tense calls and negotiations, immediately turning down a career dream and million dollar prize for me, the sort of strange excited unclear-quasiuseful confused idiot in our collaboration. fifteen minutes later, his feet were up on his desk with three toes per foot peeking out of ripped socks 3. our periodic call after i’d texted him euler blowup was just laughing for an hour or two. just laughing. i’d seen fable deal correctly with monge ampere in the equality case of ehrhart’s conjecture, so in some call before that i’d really pushed him for the craziest shit he could think of that i might try. i texted him the pdf as an update on that “diego luis 3” line, in which following his incredible expression of intuition i hodgepodge slapped together a bunch of our recent work, in particular correcting a bunch of better and lesser known papers in the literature, as well as on diego and luis’ ipm paper, and hoped an analogous construction for boussinesq (thus axisym euler) might work out. i managed to wade through enough confusion to insist to the model it stop telling me stupid regularity stuff about kelvin waves, and a rayleigh-taylor ansatz stuck. like i said, just laughing. when i texted him the pdf, the worst thing either of us had seen so far, i didn’t even comment on the euler blowup claim, only explaining why skepticism should remain for boussinesq, because i found it so shocking. i mean what the hell did i know, i must’ve confused myself by misunderstanding one adjective like i was used to with algebraic geometry. im so lucky to have been able to live that 4. he managed all this this entire time with unclear sleep, timestamps continue to amaze me, due to just recently having a kid it is obvious he deserves the same sort of praise he heaped upon luis, perhaps mutatis mutandis:)

Sebastien Bubeck @SebastienBubeck

2 months ago

@__alpoge__ nothing at all was locked we were just willing to talk but you didn't talk to us ... sorry but that's just untrue, we were willing to go above and beyond and have as many discussions as you would have liked to reach resolution.

120 29 1K 694K 170

“we cannot rule out that de-identified data derived from their usage of our products helped improve our models.” i mean props to them for straight coming clean. (so far the proof looks more along the lines of another euler blowup proof we had, off of whose ansatz naming we were making really stupid puns like “smooth criminale”, unlike the much better “ideal fluids explode”, Tristan) so i’ll now give a bit on my thinking here. i actually woulda been pumped to collaborate on this, there are a lot of people at oai i like (ok, clearly some were indirectly dicks to me because of being part of the whole situation, but im a big boy, i still like them), idgaf about authorship on that step anyway, coulda been me Tristan and every fte at oai for all i care (on that Tristan would disagree:p). but on hearing the loud convo in the hallway, especially the part where a millennium prize was offered if i’d just be removed from the paper, it was kinda clear the die had been cast and things were locked. pretty wacky, unstrategic, and unnecessary, since on my side things were mostly me and claude having a good time yoloing random stuff in the corner rather than anything institutional. i also like the idea of the labs cooperating, and even better on scientific progress. it’s a shame!

OpenAI @OpenAI

2 months ago

We congratulate Levent Alpöge and Tristan Buckmaster on their remarkable mathematical work. We (the researchers and the agents) did not see any of their work through any means until they released it publicly — in particular, no specific user data was accessed in order to solve

1K 2K 22K 8.2M 5K

@elonmusk Can we get an update on 4.7?

@XFreeze All @elonmusk needs to do is make grok heavy available at 200usd for a few days and drop 4.7 today

The BBC tried to do a gotcha.😶‍🌫️

@alexandr_wang Meta has been late to everything and that’s why their new products flop. The only time they got early was with FB and we know how they managed that.

Zucks entire career is ctrl+c ctrl+v

go fuck yourself @sama claiming that you solved navier stokes because 10000 agents ran in circles for 88hours on a multimillion dollar gpu cluster to formalize in lean a blowup case under controlled external forcing is pure scientific vulgarity the clay mathematics institute millennium prize does not ask m whether you can artificially force a singularity in a fluid by injecting an ad hoc smooth external forcing term f(x,t) to twist the vortex until it breaks the real problem questions the fundamental stability and global smooth existence for 3dimensional incompressible euler & navier stokes equations under natural conservation laws and viscous dissipation alone using a mathematical loophole on forced equations to parade a century old victory is a major conceptual scam Altman technically & epistemologically what you present as an agi breakthrough is nothing more than bruteforce combinatorial autoformalization the ai did not understand fluid mechanics it simply navigated a continuous search space previously mapped out and constrained by the monumental work of human mathematicians like tristan buckmaster/ levent alpöge / diego córdoba or tarek elgindi coordinating 10000 agents to check the logical consistency of a 100 page proof via lean is a software engineering feat and computational parallelization triumph not an intrinsic scientific discovery it is the victory of the compute bulldozer over abstract human intuition repackaged for the public as a higher mathematical consciousness to this theoretical imposture you add a disgusting ethical and industrial cynicism taking advantage of private codex sessions and informal preprints from academic researchers to siphon their research leads and then trying to redact or erase the contribution of levent alpöge under the pretext that he works at rival anthropic is intellectual serfdom openai behaves like a feudal lord of silicon appropriating the cognitive subsistence of independent scholars threatening their careers behind closed doors if they protest and turning community academic labor into a privatized pressrelease this entire staged event serves a desperate financial agenda in a pre ipo panic facing the slowdown of scaling laws and growing investor skepticism over the profitability of foundational models openai needs to manufacture an artificial sputnik moment claiming to solve a millennium prize without immediately submitting the proof to traditional peer review means using the prestige of fundamental mathematics as cheap marketing fuel to inflate a delusional valuation!!! real science is not a clout chase on social media or a compute spike spent to rob the clay mathematics institute it is a quest for elegance physical truth and universal rigor to decode reality true artificial intelligence will not emerge from hostile corporate takeover of academic work hidden behind computational bruteforce but from architectures capable of generating new conceptual paradigms by masquerading constrained formalization as the collapse of physics greatest mysteries you did not solve navier stokes you only proved how far silicon valley will go to prostitute scientific integrity for capitalist spectacle

OpenAI @OpenAI

2 months ago

We’re sharing a solution to the Navier-Stokes Millennium Prize Problem, one of the deepest problems at the frontier of mathematics. The proof was produced by a group of agents, using an OpenAI next-generation model significantly more capable than GPT-6 Astra. The problem

6K 20K 120K 75.3M 31K

I resigned from Anthropic today. I spent the last three years doing pretraining research at both OpenAI and Anthropic. Neither company is acting responsibly. They are racing straight to self-improving superintelligence and gambling with our lives. More thoughts below.

automatically copy the best grok bot setups from your timeline! x scout learns how you work (your bots/workflows + your posts), then it scouts x and finds setups worth copying, all personalized to you try it out! x.ai/bot/4iz8VYK_cG…

x.com/i/article/2097…