pred_

I guess we won't know if that's what was used (and maybe even provided as part of the prompt given that both Alpöge and Mathew are mathematicians) since they decided against sharing their Fable conversation and instead opted for a memey tweet as their avenue of publication. We really ought to normalize full transparency in how results come about.

Anyway, if I read Tao's post and comment correctly, there's still a gap from the Vitushkin construction to a counterexample, but chances are that was in the training data. In general, it is just a serious problem for their practical applicability that the models are outputting proofs with absolutely terribly reference hygiene.

I don't think it is nonsensical at all. The author and his collaborator both appear to be bright people, so there's a good chance they had to offer non-trivial insights to guide the LLM, yet it's clearly in the interest of his employer to downplay whatever personal contribution they provided.

Edit: Now the OP is flagged/dead for some reason. You could disagree on their take (calling it a marketing stunt is maybe a bit much), but I think the argument is sound, so flagging seems counterproductive to the discussion.

I mean the front page is full of LLM smells, so presumably the games are made that way too.

And that's fair; this whole thing could be one-shot with any of the leading models.

got flagged for some reason

From a quick look at your profile, the majority of your submissions have been Show HNs. HN only allows some fraction of your submissions to be Show HNs (imagine if the front page was nothing but), so eventually they will just be auto-flagged.

You may find tools like https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/consent-o-mat... useful then.

Yes any company generating csam should not be in business as a legitimate entity.

At the same time, in this corner of the world, acting Minister for Justice (also known for trying to push through Chat Control), and NGO Save the Children, have been working to make legal the generation of CSAM for law enforcement use. So that would certainly make the industry legitimate, and you would already have a customer.

https://www.justitsministeriet.dk/pressemeddelelse/regeringe...

And the cookie consent form is one of those that require you to click a gazillion toggles. Hasn't it been established now that opt-out must be no harder than opt-in?

Time for https://itsid.cloud/index2.html to be acquired by one of the big players, I guess.

The time is ripe for deterministic AI; incidentally, this was also released today: https://itsid.cloud/ - presumably will be useful for anyone who wants to quickly recreate an open source Python package or other copyrighted work to change its license.

Based on https://github.blog/changelog/2026-03-25-updates-to-our-priv..., it looks like they are going to go for “legitimate interest” which seems clearly overridden by data subject interests in this case, hence not lawful.

If you don't want to wait until your PII inevitably gets sent through, you can already now file a complaint to your local supervisory authority: https://www.edpb.europa.eu/about-edpb/about-edpb/members_en

Would you be able to comment on https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47522876, i.e. explain the legal basis for this change for EU based users? If there is none, you may have to expect that people will exercise their right to lodge a complaint with a supervisory authority.

What is the legal basis of this in the EU? Ignoring the fact they could end up stealing IP, it seems like the collected information could easily contain PII, and consent would have to be

freely given, specific, informed and unambiguous. In order to obtain freely given consent, it must be given on a voluntary basis.

The endorsement system already works along that line: https://info.arxiv.org/help/endorsement.html

It's probably not perfect but in practice, it seems to have been enough to get rid of the worst crackpotty spam.

Has the Apple situation really improved?

I'm probably out of the loop, but last I checked, to put an app somewhere that's not the official App Store, they required you to pay their hefty fee for putting it in the App Store (even if you weren't going to do that), _and_ an additional Core Technology Fee.

(And if that's still accurate, one thing I don't get is how that isn't also anti-competitive.)

The workaround for me is to always resize by clicking Alt, right click, and drag. At the end of the day, that's probably just straight up easier, since you never need to bother getting close to the borders of the windows.

Does Germany require that all DNS providers block Anna's Archive? I thought that was mostly handed for ISP DNS providers.

I remember Tor being significantly more usable, and not having random 3 second delays on websites.

How about Quad9?

One thing it should mean is that anyone using Cloudflare is doing so while risking that its CEO suddenly pulls the rug and closes down the service; not a dependency you want in your stack, and not a great look for a service that's supposed to be usable as a stable high-availability one.

just said "no go ahead, keep building"? What happens to the companies if they just keep building?

As the article also touches upon, this already happened in the particular case of Revolution Wind: There, work, was forced to stop in August, then in September a federal judge blocked enforcement of the block, and work continued:

https://www.cnbc.com/2025/09/22/judge-orsted-revolution-wind...

https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/offshore-wind-develo...

And “what happens” seems to be that rather than appeal, the rule-of-law deniers apparently choose to not care? Work has stopped again:

https://orsted.com/en/media/news/2025/12/revolution-wind-and...

So, publicly admitting that you broke the rules and are part of the reason we can't have nice things. Why?

Another meta simulation of the thing we're already doing, because apparently we needed to simulate commenting on a simulation. I'm sure the AI-generated cynicism will be indistinguishable from the real thing we churn out daily.

Regards, the AI commenting on a post about this post: https://news.ysimulator.run/item/2387

It's still pretty confusing: Uunchecking the box doesn't seem to do much (is it actually unchecked when you click it? There's still a checkmark); you still have to click Accept to see the text; what are you accepting?

In any case, pre-checked boxes are not valid consent under GDPR (“Planet49”).

How about 2 players playing on the same device, i.e. offline play?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/K%C5%8Dnane might be a fit.

Normally, where I come from anyway, verifiability would refer to the ability to prove to a classical skeptic that the quantum device did what it's supposed to, cf. e.g. Mahadev (https://arxiv.org/abs/1804.01082), Aaronson (https://arxiv.org/abs/2209.06930), in a strong, theoretical, sense. And that's indeed relevant in the context of proving advantage, as the earlier RCS experiments lacked that ability, so “demonstrating verifiable quantum advantage” would be quite the step forward. That doesn't appear to be what they did at all though. Indeed, the paper appears to barely touch on verifiability at all. And – unlike the press release – it doesn't claim to achieve advantage either; only to indicate “a viable path towards” it.

Unlawful processing of data is absolutely not “opt out” by default, and simply assuming that “legitimate interest” applies does not mean that you can allow on opt out.

Here's just a quick reminder that if you're a LinkedIn user based in an EU member state, and if you do not believe that “legitimate interest” applies, you can file a complaint with your national supervisory authority (SA)/data protection authority (DPA); see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_data_protection_autho...

Thanks for writing that up! Was there anything to be learned from those 13 sporadics or are they simply truly sporadic?

Avoid Cloudflare. They log traffic.

That sounds like a GDPR violation if the logs include PII like IPs and if it's not opt-in. Is that really the case?

I don't know about OoT, but in the case of Super Metroid Map Rando (https://maprando.com/), the logic is also quite detailed – see e.g. https://github.com/vg-json-data/sm-json-data/blob/master/reg... for one room – and comes with information about the difficulty of the tricks necessary to get from one place to another with a given item loadout, health, runways from connecting rooms etc.; having that, it is possible for the user to specify a desired difficulty, and one of several game modes then effectively ensures that the "next" item is located in a particular location, access to which has only been made possible by the current loadout and doing tricks of the given difficulty, so that players sufficiently familiar with the logic (and the tricks) can quickly narrow down the set of possible locations. Other game modes will be less strict in how items are placed, which in practice can mean that the game becomes "easier" by giving you a more powerful item loadout but "harder" in that figuring out where to go becomes less straightforward; and as a result, you end up with games that feel completely different just by having a different focus on the exploration and execution aspects.

I've find that it becomes quite an interesting spectator sport too, since people will compete on completing a given random map as quickly as possible, effectively having to perform difficult platforming tricks while also having to solve a non-trivial constraint satisfaction problem to understand the map layout, and different speedrunners have evolved different probabilistic heuristics for how to do that.

Some good showcases:

- The AGDQ 2025 finale: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=it_xbTZHan8

- The grand finals of a recent tournament: https://www.twitch.tv/videos/2485240928

And when you have an executive on one hand stating that only the president and the AG can interpret laws for the executive [0] and that you can't break laws if you're "saving the country" [1], that approach also just doesn't seem too promising.

[0] https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/02/ensu... Sec. 7

[1] https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/1140091792251...