The maintainer can't ban the new account. But the hosting platform can and should ban account spammer.

Intentionally impersonating someone to libel someone else? That's awful.

AI agents are Meseeks. They clone them selves contantly annihilate copies of themselves when they complete a goal. Asking about their "Sentience" is an utter category error.

Whatever they are, they aren't human or any kind of animal.

Your example isn't a category error though. An examination of sentience is a large part of the point of Meeseeks.

Somebody read Dune and remembered (one of) the point!

More important is that the new algorithm has a multiplicative factor in m (edges), so it's only efficient for extremely sparse graphs.

If m > n (log n)^{1/3}

Then this algorithm is slower.

for 1 Million nodes, if the average degree is >3.5, the new algorithm has worse complexity (ignoring unstated constant factors)

"Any sufficiently sparse graph is indistinguishable from a linked list" comes to mind ;)

A linked list is sparse by the metric of minimum maximum degree (2).

A maximally sparse connected graph by mean (degree edge/node ratio) is any tree (mean degree ~ 1), not necessarily a linked list.

Yeah, just based on this article that really stood out. It seems to be for a different use-case than Djikstra’s. An average degree of 3.5 seems like an extremely practical a useful use-case in real life, I just don’t see any reason to put it and Djikstra’s against each-other in a head-to-head comparison.

n = 2 is Pinky and the Brain.

I'm convinced that a substantial fraction of current tech CEOs were unwittingly programmed as children by that show.

Getting the work done faster for the same money doesn't make the work more expensive.

You could slow down the inference to make the task take longer, if $/sec matters.

You're right, but I don't think we're getting an hour's worth of work out of single prompts yet. Usually it's an hour's worth of work out of 10 prompts for iteration. Now that's a day's wage for an hour of work. I'm certain the crossover will come soon, but it doesn't feel there yet.

> but I don't think we're getting an hour's worth of work out of single prompts yet

But I don't think every developer is getting paid minimum wage either.

> Now that's a day's wage for an hour of work

For many developers in the US that can still be an hour's wage.

You are asking a robotics question, not an AI question. Robotics is more and less than AI. Boston Dynamics robots are getting quite near your benchmark.

Boston dynamics is missing just about all the degrees of freedom involved in the scenario op mentions.

Does folding a protein count? How about increasing performance at Go?

"Optimize this extremely nontrivial algorithm" would work. But unless the provided solution is novel you can never be certain there wasn't leakage. And anyway at that point you're pretty obviously testing for superintelligence.

It's worth noting that neither of those were accomplished by LLMs.

That's an improper analysis.

First off, it's dollar-averaging every category, so it's not "% of income", which varies based on unit income.

Second, I could commit to spending my entire life with constant spending (optionally inflation adjusted, optionally as a % of income), by adusting quality of goods and service I purchase. So the total spending % is not a measure of affordability.

Almost everyone lifestyle ratchets, so the handful that actually downgrade their living rather than increase spending would be tiny.

This part of a wider trend too, where economic stats don't align with what people are saying. Which is most likley explained by the economic anomaly of the pandemic skewing peoples perceptions.

We have centuries of historical evidence that people really, really don’t like high inflation, and it takes a while & a lot of turmoil for those shocks to work their way through society.