Star Trek 2009 Vulcan School

This is amazing, no doubt. Not just the craft but the ideas and presentation. However, I can't help but feel uncomfortable that this is not part of 'something bigger' -as many of the disconnected knowledge pieces across the web- that we could all contribute to (at the least for teaching/sharing/tweaking mathematics). I am talking about a vague idea of what LaTeX was for unifying typesetting but for unifying collaborative proofs+visualization. Call it "VS" [1] to make the following analogy: Before LaTeX, no one would have questioned your thesis for having handwritten equations on the gaps purposely left by you with the typewriter. It would not matter if you penciled the equation in or physically pasted a picture of it. No one would question the choice. Similarly, before this hypothetical VS, people use Matlab, Mathematica, Sage, CoQ etc without anyone questioning any of the choices for a result/proof/visualization. Even worse, before VS++ people publish papers on different journals with different degrees of access, many not even sharing the code used for arriving at such results, no way of verifying/visualizing unless you're running it in your head's OS. [1] [VIDEO] (Vulcan School) [+] I may be repeating myself [LINK]

I'd like to see a human programming language, the VR headset is placed on humans and the human is programmed by the computer to learn certain things, to produce certain outputs based upon certain inputs, like the Vulcan learning school [VIDEO] Then we have lots of programmed humans. Actually, its a very bad idea.

The equivalent of what current-gen LLMs do is an oral examination. Picture standing in the middle of a room surrounded by subject matter experts grilling you for your knowledge of various random topics. You have no tools, no calculator, no pencil and paper. You’re asked a question and you just have to spit out the answer. No option to backtrack, experiment, or self correct. “Translate this to Hebrew”. “Is this a valid criticism of this passage from a Platonic perspective?” “Explain counterfactual determinism in Quantum Mechanics.” “What is the cube root of 74732?” You would fail all of these. The AI gets 3 of 4 correct. Tell me who’s smarter? You because of your preconceptions, or because of real superiority? Your model for human intelligence is probably more like this scene: [VIDEO] The reality is the opposite. The AI could answer questions in this scenario but no nonfictional human could.

This was spot-on until you the final sentence. And that was more an individual position ("I will trust") rather than a general prescription ("You should trust")...so I am not sure why this is unpopular. AI does have the potential to be a private tutor. Think that scene from Star Trek (2009)[1] or The Young Ladies Illustrated Primer. Companies are making 11-12 figure bets that AI will be huge, so this comment isn't out of line. [1] [VIDEO]