On Apr 16, 2024, at 10:11, John Robinson via groups.io <profilecovenant@...> wrote:

Thank you Lee for your in depth analysis. What are your thoughts on the use of Ai on deadly biological weapons by bad actors? By Ai starting to think & making their own decisions?

I don’t know if you watched Musk demonstration of 3 Robots demonstrating the bullet proof Cyber truck? Pretty cool unless a fake. Supposedly on another occasion one of the robots disagreed with a human & became aggressive with a human’s arm. Musk has been one of the largest proponents of slowing all this down & having government restrictions & safeguards on development, to protect humans. Few seem to agree.

John

On Apr 15, 2024, at 11:28?PM, Lee Larson via groups.io <leelarson@...> wrote:

?On Apr 14, 2024, at 6:42?AM, John Robinson via groups.io <profilecovenant@...> wrote:

I wonder what Lee & other math Wizards think of this?

John

Why AIs that tackle complex maths could be the next big breakthrough
Mathematical AIs show machine intelligence may emerge from unexpected pursuits
Read in New Scientist:

I’ve been thinking about writing about AI here ever since February 3, when John posted the following:

Harry, I’m a guy that listens to hundreds of Audio Books, many Biographies, Autobiographies. Steve Jobs, Elon Musk, Charlie Munger, Ray Dalio, Tony Robbins and on and on it goes. I also listen to a plethora of investment works. I’VE NEVER HAD ONE TOTALLY CHANGE MY THINKING like “The Coming WAVE” by Mustafa Suleyman.

I added that book to my reading list, and finally finished it in the middle of March. I’ve been mulling over it and several other ones ever since.

To greatly oversimplify, right now what we call AI is really a huge pattern search engine. We feed it a bunch of data and it correlates the data into a big collection of connected nodes. It is also programmed with rules that tell it how to traverse the nodes. With a huge set of input data and a rich rule set, there might be many ways to traverse the graph. Given a command, it chooses the path its rules deem most likely to result in a correct result. This process can require a huge amount of computing, if the data set is large and the rules are complex.

In mathematics, the computer is given a data set of known results in an area. For example, it might be given a huge collection of algebra equations and the steps to their solutions. It’s also given the rules of algebra and logic. When you ask it to solve a new equation, it will look for something in its dataset that is similar the new equation. Since the thing in its dataset has a well-defined solution, it tries to use the same steps to solve the new equation. Programs such as Mathematica, Maple, and SageMath have been doing this for many years. They can solve any equation from a high school algebra class and much more.

The problem that comes up is when the problem can't be twisted into something similar to something else in the data set, the program is stuck.

All the examples I know of where AI systems solved difficult math problems are similar to what I described above, except the training data sets are many examples of proofs, and the rules are complicated. With a diverse enough data set and a rich set of rules, the program might very well be able to construct tricky proofs of difficult problems.

In fact, quite a few years ago I read an article in Math Intelligencer (I think??) about a computer program that was taught the basic facts of Euclidean geometry, which form a nice and fairly simple closed system. The programmers just told it to start proving facts by wandering around its database and following the logic rules it was programmed to use. The result was hundreds of “theorems”. Few of them were interesting and the interesting ones were already known—with a couple of exceptions. It did manage to find some new proofs of well-known theorems.

The moral to this story is that the computer didn’t really come up with anything new, because it didn’t have any new ideas, and this is the weakness with the AI mathematical proving programs. The great mathematicians are great because they came up with new ideas. The names we remember are Newton, Euler, Gauss, Cantor, Noether, Neumann, Turing, and many others, because they didn’t just just prove hard things, they came up with unprecedented methods and ideas.

Today’s AI programs are showing uncanny technical virtuosity in many areas, but they aren’t yet showing originality.

Don’t think what I’ve written means I think AI is pure hype and just another tech bubble. It is doing some seemingly magical things, particularly in medicine, where it is already better than almost all doctors in spotting some heart problems and breast cancer. In both of these cases, the AI diagnosis is often earlier and more accurate than standard diagnoses, and the experts don’t really understand what it’s seeing.

Returning at last to the Suleyman book, I do think a lot of it is hype coming from an AI entrepreneur. He does a lot of hand-waving and has few details. I do believe his claim AI will have a profound effect in biology because it’s the only way we know to make sense of the large databases of proteins and DNA. I am skeptical of his claims about the imminence of AGI (= artificial general intelligence).

L^2

The good Christian should beware of mathematicians and all those who make empty prophecies. The danger already exists that mathematicians have made a covenant with the devil to darken the spirit and confine man in the bonds of Hell. — Augustinus

On Apr 15, 2024, at 11:28?PM, Lee Larson via groups.io <leelarson@...> wrote:

?On Apr 14, 2024, at 6:42?AM, John Robinson via groups.io <profilecovenant@...> wrote:

I wonder what Lee & other math Wizards think of this?

John

Why AIs that tackle complex maths could be the next big breakthrough
Mathematical AIs show machine intelligence may emerge from unexpected pursuits

Read in New Scientist:?

I’ve been thinking about writing about AI here ever since February 3, when John posted the following:

Harry, I’m a guy that listens to hundreds of Audio Books, many Biographies, Autobiographies. ?Steve Jobs, Elon Musk, Charlie Munger, Ray Dalio, Tony Robbins and on and on it goes. ?I also listen to a plethora of investment works. ?I’VE NEVER HAD ONE TOTALLY CHANGE MY THINKING like “The Coming WAVE” by Mustafa Suleyman.

I added that book to my reading list, and finally finished it in the middle of March. I’ve been mulling over it and several other ones ever since.

To greatly oversimplify, right now what we call AI is really a huge pattern search engine. We feed it a bunch of data and it correlates the data into a big collection of connected nodes. It is also programmed with rules that tell it how to traverse the nodes. With a huge set of input data and a rich rule set, there might be many ways to traverse the graph. Given a command, it chooses the path its rules deem most likely to result in a correct result. This process can require a huge amount of computing, if the data set is large and the rules are complex.

In mathematics, the computer is given a data set of known results in an area. For example, it might be given a huge collection of algebra equations and the steps to their solutions. It’s also given the rules of algebra and logic. When you ask it to solve a new equation, it will look for something in its dataset that is similar the new equation. Since the thing in its dataset has a well-defined solution, it tries to use the same steps to solve the new equation. Programs such as Mathematica, Maple, and SageMath?have been doing this for many years. They can solve any equation from a high school algebra class and much more.

The problem that comes up is when the problem can't be twisted into something similar to something else in the data set, the program is stuck.

All the examples I know of where AI systems solved difficult math problems are similar to what I described above, except the training data sets are many examples of proofs, and the rules are complicated. With a diverse enough data set and a rich set of rules, the program might very well be able to construct tricky proofs of difficult problems.

In fact, quite a few years ago I read an article in Math Intelligencer (I think??) about a computer program that was taught the basic facts of Euclidean geometry, which form a nice and fairly simple closed system. The programmers just told it to start proving facts by wandering around its database and following the logic rules it was programmed to use. The result was hundreds of “theorems”. Few of them were interesting and the interesting ones were already known—with a couple of exceptions. It did manage to find some new proofs of well-known theorems.

The moral to this story is that the computer didn’t really come up with anything new, because it didn’t have any new ideas, and this is the weakness with the AI mathematical proving programs. The great mathematicians are great because they came up with new ideas. The names we remember are Newton, Euler, Gauss, Cantor, Noether, Neumann, Turing, and many others, because they didn’t just just prove hard things, they came up with unprecedented methods and ideas.

Today’s AI programs are showing uncanny technical virtuosity in many areas, but they aren’t yet showing originality.

Don’t think what I’ve written means I think AI is pure hype and just another tech bubble. It is doing some seemingly magical things, particularly in medicine, where it is already better than almost all doctors in spotting some heart problems and breast cancer. In both of these cases, the AI diagnosis is often earlier and more accurate than standard diagnoses, and the experts don’t really understand what it’s seeing.

Returning at last to the Suleyman book, I do think a lot of it is hype coming from an AI entrepreneur. He does a lot of hand-waving and has few details. I do believe his claim AI will have a profound effect in biology because it’s the only way we know to make sense of the large databases of proteins and DNA. I am skeptical of his claims about the imminence of AGI (= artificial general intelligence).

L^2

The good Christian should beware of mathematicians and all those who make empty prophecies. The danger already exists that mathematicians have made a covenant with the devil to darken the spirit and confine man in the bonds of Hell.?—?Augustinus

On Apr 4, 2024, at 11:02 AM, Harry Jacobson-Beyer via groups.io <hejb44@...> wrote:

Hello everyone,
Yesterday I picked up my new Bluetooth enabled hearing aides from the VA. My audiologist was talking about the technology and told me there is a new bluetooth in the works. He said he didn’t know how far in the future it will be but when it comes and when electronic manufacturers start rolling out products with the new bluetooth my hearing aids will be able to automatically connect to my TV or any TV with out an intermediary black box just by being in close proximity to a TV with the new bluetooth

Currently I have a blue tooth “black box” attached to the sound output on my TV and when I put my new hearing aids on top of the box, they paired automatically and voila - I can hear the TV sound through my hearing aids.

I am sure there is probably a downside to this new Bluetooth but….

Have any of you heard about this “new, more advanced bluetooth?

On Mar 31, 2024, at 11:04, Harry Jacobson-Beyer via groups.io <hejb44@...> wrote:

?Follow the link below to view the article.

‘Obituary pirates’ produce latest AI scam



Harry

On Mar 26, 2024, at 8:26?PM, Lee Larson via groups.io <leelarson@...> wrote:

On Mar 26, 2024, at 4:28?PM, Harry Jacobson-Beyer via groups.io <hejb44@...> wrote:

Is it safe to use this form of payment at the gas pump, in the doctor’s office, etc? If so is it as safe as Apple Pay?

When you see the fan symbol like this you can usually use Apple Pay there.

Any of those RFID-type payment systems are safer than sticking a credit card into a slot or handing your card to a cashier because they have pretty good encryption for all their communication and usually generate one-time codes for thei transaction.

L^2

On Mar 26, 2024, at 4:35?PM, Richard D. Meadows via groups.io <rmeadows@...> wrote:

?I have one in both of our cars. ?

It won’t hurt for sure. And there are any number of cases where a stolen car was found because of an air tag being in it. ?

Richard

Richard D. Meadows

Louisville KY 40212

(502) 593-5830

rmeadows@...

On Mar 26, 2024, at 16:26, Harry Jacobson-Beyer <hejb44@...> wrote:

Do AirTags work on wifi? Cellular data?

If I were to hide an AirTag in my car and if the car were stolen would the AirTag be traceable? If so would anyone be able to see it?

I hope this is clear. Bottom line is it worth putting an AirTag in my car in order to find it if it goes missing - for example if I lose it in a parking log? :-)

On Mar 26, 2024, at 16:26, Harry Jacobson-Beyer <hejb44@...> wrote:

Do AirTags work on wifi? Cellular data?

If I were to hide an AirTag in my car and if the car were stolen would the AirTag be traceable? If so would anyone be able to see it?

I hope this is clear. Bottom line is it worth putting an AirTag in my car in order to find it if it goes missing - for example if I lose it in a parking log? :-)