Aren't we already at a worse place, where largest companies on earth doesn't have any support and you need to have a HN following to get their attention?

That depends on the kid and time. Mine carries the small cart and fills what we buy regularly. And other times we need to contrain him as expected.

I agree LLMs are exceptionally helpful on this.

I have built one PCB with esp32-s3-wroom-1. Usb line is working and I can program the mcu module. However I could not make the ip5306 auto start on battery yet. And I am still unable to get audio from pcm5102a + pam8403 pipeline.

What I have well learned is It's a hard, time consuming and relatively expensive hobby.

Perhaps we could help each other?

Similarly I thought it was a satire about the AI generated cve reports.

We already know that same problem has been examined by many credible mathematicians already and couldn't be solved by any of them yet.

Why are we expecting AGI to one shot it? Can't we have an AGI that can fails occasionally to solve some math problem? Is the expectation of AGI to be all knowing?

By the way I agree that AGI is not around the corner or I am not arguing any of the llm s are "thinking machines". It's just I agree goal post or posts needs to be set well.

People want to believe in magic so they will find excuses to do so. Computers have been proving theorems for a long time now but Isabelle/HOL didn't have the marketing budget of OpenAI so people didn't care. Now that Sam Altman is doing the marketing people all of a sudden care about proving theorems.

Isabelle/HOL (a specialized software to do math proofs) doing proofs is not the analogue to LLMs (with the common accepted degeratory description: automated plagiarism machine) being capable of doing proofs. It's not the marketing, it's what the intention and the capability matrix is coming up to. I would be excited the same when Isabelle/HOL writes poetry.

Chemistry is magic to uninitiated. Perhaps LLMs are to you because you are not initiated yet? I never said LLMs are AGI or will ever be AGI. I also never suggested LLMs are perfect and can prove math problems. But having incidents suggesting there are instances that does excites me. Because it was never in my expectation levels.

You are calling something “magic” that actually happened in real life.

You were misrepresenting what actually happened b/c you want to believe in magic. I'm not calling it magic, I'm saying your interpretation of events is magical b/c you don't actually understand how computers work. There is nothing magical about theorem proving, Isabelle/HOL has been doing it for decades.

Isabelle/HOL haven't been solving open problems, as far as I'm aware. They've been used for making fully-formal proofs of problems that were already considered proved to a satisfactory level by the mathematical community. I believe mathematicians generally consider proving something to the mathematical community the "hard part", while making it fully formal is just a kind of tedious bookkeeping thing.

I read this as you are in fact in agreement with the statement. If that's the ceiling, provide the same level of service and gain more of the market. In which you have all the means to be faster, non-intrusive, and less faulty so that you can be always better.

Source leak or free code review? I can say that there is no bad publicity.

Well Unfortunately I can also argue, Apple has no taste anymore. At least, less of it day by day.