Asking on zulip is the good first step, yes. But RFC or MCP is only needed for bigger changes. Majority of changes will not need that, especially the ones contributed by newcomers.
> 4B or "Four Nos" is a South Korean radical feminist[1] movement whose proponents do not date men, marry men, have sex with men, or have children with men.
huh... is that really feminism? or just homosexuality / asexuality?
I'd say it's more citizen-level apoptosis. These women are the ones exiting the gene pool, not the whole civilization.
But also 4B is an outsized meme especially in the west. It's like furries. We all know about them, but they are not typical people who you can draw conclusions about the civilization from.
The women aren't the ones detecting they have something wrong with them. They are detecting there is something wrong with the next level up, and shutting down that whole thing. Like an apoptosis gene triggered by excessive misfolded proteins.
But in reality they aren't "shutting down that whole thing", they are shutting down their personal lineage and not much else. The women might not be conscious of something wrong with themselves, but if they were cells in a body, their behavior would not indicate the body is sick, only that they are.
... what is understanding of mathematics anyway? if some AI result helps a mathematician to solve more problems I would say then that it gave them some understanding, but just as there are proofs that span hundreds of pages it's likely that soon proofs will be long Lean programs and studying them will be part of mathematics, just as studying Go played by AI.
This blog post talks in depth about what you're talking about. It may interest you. It even talks about the future where math proofs are just Lean programs, and why that won't necessarily be a good thing.
I have complicated feelings regarding academia, and in general IMHO it's way past due to start focusing on quality instead of hype.
who was first to some kind of novelty? who cares. someone did something but no one can replicate it? intentionally wasting public money. fraud by any other name.
"science" wouldn't move slower if we would build more robust data generating processes.
of course, since usually it's hard to judge quality academia uses proxies. not to mention that the people who could usually are also live inside fancy glassware. and it would be a shame to rock the boat.
... but math is doubly special, because we accepted that it doesn't matter (until it does, but then it's called cryptography and logistics network optimization and high frequency trading, and machine learning), and how long a problem stays unsolved was quite a good proxy.
still, if AI solves the easy ones we can finally have fun with the hard ones!
that doesn't mean much. it has a lot of tests, the architect seems sane, it fits a niche (for example scripts baked into container images don't need full (Node + tsx + esbuild) or Bun/Deno)
sure, and there are obvious pitfalls, but IMHO it's much better than going to a 100+ dates and not reflecting on what went wrong/well after any of them.
more transactions can commit at the same time, but with one counter they would conflict (as it did in the Redis case)
they should use CRDT (and trying to model that with this 1000 row workspace, no?)
still, eventually at some point they need to do the math