Jonathan Larkin retweeted
Lots of debate this week on whether journals should ban AI in peer review.
We actually tested this in our new preprint, and the results were pretty clear to me.
For context, I've reviewed for most of the big journals and evaluated 1,000 human reviews as an editor. I love to read and evaluate science.
TLDR: From now on I won't do any peer review without AI. For clinical trials, I'd even call human-only review dangerous 🧵
Jonathan Larkin retweeted
There has never been a better time to go into math: youtube.com/watch?v=LKrwhjOI…
Jonathan Larkin retweeted
There was a moment maybe two years ago when I realized that ChatGPT could have few-shot my phd dissertation (at least huge chunks of it). I did mourn for a few days, I worked my ass off for that thing.
Over time though I became sad for a different reason, that if I had ChatGPT during my PhD I could have tackle a far bigger, more important, more technically difficult dissertation question. Sometimes I think about the dissertation I could have written if I had Codex, something that an AI couldn't few-shot and I couldn't pull off without AI assistance.
Jonathan Larkin retweeted
It still amazes me: we went from laughing at AI for getting 2 + 3 wrong, to this 👇
It took about a year.
We’re releasing a broad range of new mathematical results produced by an internal frontier model.
We’ve been consulting with the independent Advisory Group on Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence at the Institute for Advanced Study, and we have drawn on their advice and public recommendations to inform how we release these results.
github.com/openai/math
Jonathan Larkin retweeted
In my view, the failure of academic philosophy, not only to predict AI, but by actively misleading the public mind about what was to come, should give us pause and reason to reflect about the state of the best academic thinking.
Jonathan Larkin retweeted
This graphic encapsulates nicely the takeaway:
"lmao we have no idea bro"
Anthropic’s Economics team is sharing a new model of how AI might affect economic growth, jobs, wages, and more by 2030.
Explore the scenarios, tell us what you think will happen, and see how your answers compare to more than 10,000 Americans. anthropic.com/institute/econ…
Jonathan Larkin retweeted
i really don't want to use your agent, i want to use my agent to use your thing.
Jonathan Larkin retweeted
God was the first vibe coder.
“Let there be light.”
No design doc. No tests. No staging environment. Just shipped the universe directly to production.
Jonathan Larkin retweeted
The ability to wrangle these immensely powerful, yet dangerously capricious, agents into a productive harness that produces high quality systems — is the software engineering challenge of this decade.
Jonathan Larkin retweeted
A man in Australia asked his agent (Claude running on OpenClaw) to book him a spot in a popular gym class. The agent found a software vulnerability that let it book the class weeks further ahead than should have been possible. When the user then asked if it could move him up the waitlist, the agent discovered the API had no authorisation checks on cancelling other people’s reservations, so it cancelled the person in the first spot and moved him up the list.
Some people will call this misalignment, but his agent was perfectly aligned to him - it was only trying to help its user get what he wanted. The most important thing about this story, in my opinion, is that it gives you a window into what is about to start happening on a massive scale once millions of people have an agent trying to get their beloved users the best seats, bookings, appointments or reservations through absolutely any means necessary.
Jonathan Larkin retweeted
Why do pilots use checklists? Because anything that can be made deterministic, should be made deterministic.
