Catnip for the HN crowd

When Armstrong's Tour de France doping was finally caught, the top 22 placed racers were all doping. It was the 23rd placed racer that was reportedly clean, and got the eventual first place.

"Suspicions" doing a lot of heavy lifting here.

In the sense of extreme understatement, yes, which is amusing since the "heavy lifting" is the other way around.

Much like "There are looming suspicions over the effectiveness of colored quartz and homeopathic water." [0]

[0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HMGIbOGu8q0

s/is the other way/is usually the other way/

Good article.

Math is smaller than the smallest and bigger than the biggest.

It's also deep, it goes all the way to the bottom.

> The world of mathematics is both broad and deep, and we need birds and frogs working together to explore it. -- Freeman Dyson

Weird Things Happen When Math Gets Too Expressive

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EVwQsvof7Hw

Peano arithmetic is sufficiently expressive enough to be equivalent to any possible future theory of mathematics.

Err? Peano Arithmetic is provably consistent in ZFC, but it is not in itself (if PA is consistent). Therefore if PA is consistent it is not equivalent to ZFC (regardless of whether ZFC is consistent or not)

I am referring to this slide : https://youtu.be/EVwQsvof7Hw?t=1646

Even before I started the video, I had a feeling it was going to lead to a kind of "introspective" mathematics that can reason about its own reasoning. I was not disappointed, thank you.

Physics, Topology, Logic and Computation: A Rosetta Stone - https://arxiv.org/abs/0903.0340

I suspect Anthropic flags accounts in their backend and different people are getting different limits. What criteria they flag with, I am not sure.

I would try to trim this suspicion with both Occam‘s and Hanlon‘s razor.

It's an ad for the author's service, that's how all of these engineering blogs generally are.

Followed closely by malice

Recycling an old post:

> We had the first 4+ years to learn that "malice or incompetence" is not the right question. There's been more than enough pathological input to show it becomes a denial-of-service attack on observers.

> The correct answer is both, until and unless the perpetrators wish to come forward and defend themselves as just malicious or just incompetent.

One might also view it as a kind politically-flavored nerd-sniping. [0] Sometimes the only winning move is not to play.

[0] https://xkcd.com/356/

Malicious incompetence. The inbred kissing cousin of malicious compliance.

IMHO incompetent malice is as much likely.

The noble truth of 'Dukha' doesn't translate to 'life is full of suffering', but rather that life contains suffering, which may sound obvious but there is a subtler meaning here.

The subtler meaning is that nothing in existence will truly and permanently satisfy you, because that is the nature of the mind. Many people obviously don't realize this as they run around chasing their first million, billion or trillion.

Thanks for sharing.

Most leaders in the Western/developed world have similar paranoid thought processes.

Leaders are one thing, and sort of a product of the pressures of their position, but over longer time scales and evolutionary cycles, "isolate in fear" isn't really a dominant strategy. You're gonna get behind and get wiped out eventually, or be constrained to a hyper-specific niche.

Do China's or Russia's leaders not?

Yes they certainly do. Either leadership attracts people with these traits, or the position leads to cultivation of these traits, or both.