Corey Yanofsky, α-stable statistician

@life_like_what @HazelAppleyard it's an Irish idiom

@HazelAppleyard “giving out to me”… is this a new phrase people are using? it sounds as retarded as this woman is

If there was ever a bigger sign not to marry someone…

@jdlichtman @octonion "...AI discovers a new opening line that had been overlooked based on human aesthetics and convention" this did kind of happen -- strong chess engines taught humans that wing pawns have a lot more attacking potential than unaided humans had perceived

In my doctorate, I proved the Erdős Primitive Set Conjecture, showing that the primes themselves are maximal among all primitive sets. This problem will always be in my heart: I worked on it for 4 years (even when my mentors recommended against it!) and loved every minute of it. [Primitive sets are a vast generalization of the prime numbers: A set S is called primitive if no number in S divides another.] Now Erdős#1196 is an asymptotic version of Erdős' conjecture, for primitive sets of "large" numbers. It was posed in 1966 by the Hungarian legends Paul Erdős, András Sárközy, and Endre Szemerédi. I'd been working on it for many years, and consulted/badgered many experts about it, including my mentors Carl Pomerance and James Maynard. The the proof produced by GPT5.4 Pro was quite surprising, since it rejected the "gambit" that was implicit in all works on the subject since Erdős' original 1935 paper. The idea to pass from analysis to probability was so natural & tempting from a human-conceptual point of view, that it obscured a technical possibility to retain (efficient, yet counter-intuitve) analytic terminology throughout, by use of the von Mangoldt function \Lambda(n). The closest analogy I would give would be that the main openings in chess were well-studied, but AI discovers a new opening line that had been overlooked based on human aesthetics and convention. In fact, the von Mangoldt function itself is celebrated for it's connection to primes and the Riemann zeta function--but its piecewise definition appears to be odd and unmotivated to students seeing it for the first time. By the same token, in Erdős#1196, the von Mangoldt weights seem odd and unmotivated but turn out to cleverly encode a fundamental identity \sum_{q|n}\Lambda(q) = \log n, which is equivalent to unique factorization of n into primes. This is the exact trick that breaks the analytic issues arising in the "usual opening". Moreover, Terry Tao has long suspected that the applications of probability to number theory are unnecessarily complicated and this "trick" might actually clarify the general theory, which would have a broader impact than solving a single conjecture.

@randallsquared @Bunagayafrost youtu.be/KfHbsMa_wao?si…

@Bunagayafrost "No one but you thinks you're a copy." Adjust the machine to produce two each time and everyone will immediately come around to that understanding.

Short story: Teleportation Matt: "Hey I have big news!" Bob: "What? What is it?" M: "I'll show you. Stand right over here." B: "Ok, I don't know what's going on but am ready." (zap) B: "What!? I was over there but now I'm over here??" M: "Haha! Exactly! I created a teleportation machine!" B: "What?" M: "Yeah, cool huh? It took a decade but I finally did it!" B: "You...You teleported me?" M: "Yup" B: "OMG! I died! I'm dead!" M: "What? Did something go wrong?" B: "Oh, no! no, I'm a copy. Bob died! My original is dead!" M: "Ohh, I see." B: "What am I supposed to do? What do I tell my wife?" M: "Just take over bro. No one cares." B: "No, I can't! That would be unethical. God, no I have to tell my wife. No, not my wife, my original's wife Jessica." M: "You really don't have to..." B: "Jessica it's me...no, it's not me (sobbing). Your husband is dead." Jessica: "Um, who am I talking to then?" B: "His copy...I was teleported moments ago." J: "Oh what, mad man Matt finally did it! Say congrats for me." M: "Thanks Jessica." B: "Guys, I...Bob is dead! Don't you guys get it?" J: "I don't know what's up but be home by 6 ok. Tonight's tacos night. Kids are pumped. Love ya." B: "She just hung up me like it's nothing. The house isn't even mine anymore..." M: "Don't worry you're still you." B: "No I'm not! I'm a copy Matt! You killed my original and made ME, a copy!" M: "You can't blame me, Matt's who made the teleportation machine! I'm his copy!" B: "What, you're a copy too!?" M: "No! I'm a copy-of-a-copy-of-a-copy-of...I need to check the record to be precise. But of course I did safety check on myself before I teleported you." B: "Ah, thanks. But still!" M: "Like seriously what are you going to do about it? No one but you thinks you're a copy." B: "but..." M: "Tonight's taco night. Go home and cheat with your wife, copy Bob" B: "I, I can't! I'm not Bob, that would be...kinda hot actually." M: "Say hi to the kids for me." B: "Ok, see ya copy Matt!" (Door closes) M: "Rest in peace Bob..."

@somethingthink2 the fact that no one can supply (in the sense of "generate") land (or EM spectrum or fresh gold deposits or sunlight, etc)

@somethingthink2 gonna be honest, this good faith reply surprised me -- i thought you'd be out just a cynic, me my good faith reply to you is that i don't really get what you're trying to convey when you write "geometry" (surveying?) and why that would be more important economically than

People sort of act like they live in a fairytale in which there’s a group of privileged land owners and then on the other hand the peasants who have been locked out. But in our country what happens is we buy land with money. You aren’t granted the privilege to use it. You buy it with money, like everything else. And the title transfers. You can save up some money and go buy some land yourself. High housing prices, notwithstanding, very large shares of the country are still homeowners. It’s not like this is an extreme minority group.

@somethingthink2 no -- it's a straightforward question; answer or don't

@Corey_Yanofsky I've already told you in another post my distinction between land property and other types of property in terms of being a physical property of the Universe. Explain the reasoning behind your question. x.com/somethingthink…

@somethingthink2 is it your position that the electromagnetic spectrum is better characterized as "goods and services" than as " physical property of the universe"? please expound

@Corey_Yanofsky @TheStalwart @LudditeHacker @xwanyex Yeah these are all arbitrary. You're talking about them as though they are physical properties of the Universe.

@LuckyDance_ no one's talking about "assault on a police officer" -- knowledge that the victim was a police officer is part of those statutes and everyone can see that element was missing here it's just an ordinary battery that happened to be done to someone with authority to arrest

@SamMarlow695140 @MissSassbox Who wasn't acting as a police officer at the time

watched a girl do this in a bar after he said he was married and didn't want her number. for some reason she laughed hysterically afterwards with her girl. he waited until she was done laughing and then pulled out his badge. off duty. whole bar went ooOooooOooOOOOoOoooo

@somethingthink2 @TheStalwart @LudditeHacker @xwanyex land improvements are different from land -- the supply of land improvements responds to price signals mineral rights get taxed too exclusive rights to a portion of the electromagnetic spectrum? taxed exclusive rights to a portion of Earth's insolation? taxed

Many natural resources are finite, i.e. non-renewable, in that you can't produce more gold, barring the sense in which a rabbit comes from a hat. There is also no supplier of gold that someone would then produce it from. That doesn't make logical sense to me. The primary difference in land is that it's based on geometry. But in the rabbit sense, a "supplier" can "produce" a parcel of land for building that was initially unfit. There's no functional difference between that and mining for gold, other than gold is portable and the land isn't because it's a mathematical region of a sphere.

@musikutiv @Nature they did the thing youtu.be/Hz1fyhVOjr4?si…

Whenever I need a laugh, I read a @Nature reporting summary checklist. Today’s highlight in section Sample Size: “All experiments […] were conducted with a sample size of at least three to ensure minimal statistical power analysis.”

@mikesmithdude this kind of perpetually vertical supply curve is the hallmark of the "right" kind of thing to tax: (i) it is exactly that which no human can make and hence ought not to benefit any one owner and (ii) taxing it causes no deadweight loss

@mikesmithdude in this framework land -- actually let's call it Land -- the only thing you want to tax -- is anything with a vertical supply curve land? Land seabed? Land electromagnetic spectrum? Land insolation? Land buildings? not Land

“Landowners should pay for the privilege of monopolizing access to land.” That’s called a market price!

@mikesmithdude seabed is land, dikes are land improvements

@yhdistyminen @xwanyex God handed this job over to the Netherlands and Boston.

@coheedontop @yhdistyminen keep corncobbin' it you goober, you can definitely post your way out of looking stupid by trying to be misogynistic to a dude

@yhdistyminen Yea, im aware. Just was playing to your insufferable delusions, I was reliably told that would help you in your condition 🤣🤣

On today's episode of "Modern Woman Makes Case for End of Universal Suffrage":

@katzenbrau it is, probably by accident, fair

@somethingthink2 @TheStalwart @LudditeHacker @xwanyex it's finite in the sense that (unlike, say, TVs or oil) no price signal will ever prompt suppliers of land to produce more land (because there are no suppliers of land)

@TheStalwart @LudditeHacker @xwanyex Can you name the resources for which there's an infinite amount?

@katzenbrau because the insect thing is just trolling

@katzenbrau yes

@katzenbrau i hate to say it

@katzenbrau uh huh