Prof in entrepreneurship & GenAI @Haskayneschool. Maker of https://nitter.gq/t.co/1BG4KFm3Jw, https://nitter.gq/t.co/z0ozbKNiJW, https://nitter.gq/t.co/IppyXplTi5, & https://nitter.gq/t.co/eG20WRZ5dH
Calgary, Alberta, Canada
Joined May 2008
- Tweets10.9K
- Following6.3K
- Followers2K
- Likes65.2K
I've moved my blog to Substack to more clearly separate my blog from my personal website (MohammadKeyhani[dot]com) and consulting work (the new DigitVibe[dot]com coming soon). If you followed my blog please follow me again on Substack
keyhanimo.substack.com/p/mov…
5
173
Here's a simple tool I made to help take the pain out of reference letters with full privacy protection: recombuilder.com/
1
Here's a simple tool I made to help take the pain out of reference letters with full privacy protection: recombuilder.com/
1
Here's a simple tool I made to help take the pain out of reference letters with full privacy protection: recombuilder.com/
7
lol, here's a simple tool I made to help take the pain out of reference letters with full privacy protection: recombuilder.com/
4
Here's a simple tool I made to help take the pain out of reference letters with full privacy protection: recombuilder.com/
1
8
Here's a simple tool I made to help take the pain out of reference letters with full privacy protection: recombuilder.com/
11
Here's a simple tool I made to help take the pain out of reference letters with full privacy protection: recombuilder.com/
5
lol, here's a simple tool I made to help take the pain out of reference letters with full privacy protection: recombuilder.com/
lol, here's a simple tool I made to help take the pain out of reference letters with full privacy protection: recombuilder.com/
lol, here's a simple tool I made to help take the pain out of reference letters with full privacy protection: recombuilder.com/
Here's a popular tool to help draft reference letters with full privacy protection: recombuilder.com/
22
Mohammad Keyhani retweeted
JOE ROGAN: The computing power on your phone today. can you beat your phone at the highest level?
MAGNUS CARLSEN: No. No chance.
JOE ROGAN: That’s crazy. Wasn’t Deep Blue basically a whole stack of computers? And your phone is probably more powerful than that today.
MAGNUS CARLSEN: It’s shocking. I have no chance against my phone.
JOE ROGAN: So how do you even play against computers?
MAGNUS CARLSEN: I rarely play against engines because they just make me feel stupid and useless. I think of them more as a tool.
JOE ROGAN: But have computers actually changed how you understand chess?
MAGNUS CARLSEN: Absolutely. Neural networks have improved our understanding of the game immensely.
JOE ROGAN: What did you learn from them that humans weren’t already doing?
MAGNUS CARLSEN: One big thing was long-term king safety. Humans used to push pawns mainly as an attacking tool. But the engines showed that you could push a pawn and create a weakness 20 or 30 moves later that would make the opponent’s king less safe.
JOE ROGAN: So the computer basically showed you ideas that humans weren’t seeing.
MAGNUS CARLSEN: Exactly. There was a period where you could clearly see which players were using these new neural-network ideas and which weren’t.
JOE ROGAN: And you were one of the guys who figured it out early?
MAGNUS CARLSEN: Yeah. My coach got into it very quickly, and we gained an advantage over almost everybody.
JOE ROGAN: That’s insane. The machines aren’t just better at calculating, they’re actually teaching the best players how to think differently.
MAGNUS CARLSEN: That’s probably the biggest impact they’ve had on chess.
Mohammad Keyhani retweeted
Working with AI requires perpetually operating at the edge of sanity. You have to recalibrate your mental model of AI capabilities and your own job description every few months, without getting delusional about seemingly infinite productivity gains, or feeling threatened by losing what you thought was the uniquely human part of your job, or obsessing over the perfect setup, or losing your mind over the clumsiness and jaggedness of agents, or ...
Maybe AI literacy needs to be less about prompting and more about improving emotional regulation.
Does this mean that they understand the "black box" in a way that humans don't or are they just using the same techniques that human experts would use?
135
Mohammad Keyhani retweeted
I study AI consciousness and personhood for a living, and people have been telling me to watch this episode for years. I finally watched it for the first time last week, and the writing and acting blew me away. It could be released today, and it would still be ahead of its time.
I think for a generation of boys who don't have good models of manhood, Picard is a pretty good choice indeed.
Something I've been having trouble articulating is that Picard is an ideal masculine figure. He is wise and kind and understanding but when push comes to shove he makes it clear that he will engage in violence and he's gonna be fuckin good at it
86
Mohammad Keyhani retweeted
Just learned that Patrick Stewart has passed away. Such a sad loss. Here he is in one of the best things ever put on television, the Star Trek episode “The Measure of a Man.” I show it to my students in Philosophy and Science Fiction every year.
Mohammad Keyhani retweeted
People who have been in research fields develop a felt sense that most "research" (in almost any field that isn't exactingly technical) is research theater, and many superstar careers enjoy star status not because of a unique connection to the truth but because of a unique connection with an audience. No one really has the time or stature to, from a position of objectivity and trust, bring popular researchers to heel. But it will get increasingly hard to hide from serious critique. The machines can do critique now, at the level of depth and rigor previously only possible for the academically deranged. We're going to have to revise a lot of what we "know" about the world that isn't really knowledge but is actually just received popular consensus - like floating voltages without grounding wires. The grounding wires are coming.
Tyler Cowen:
'I am not even sure what to say at this point. We need a radical revaluation of this work, and of the associated policy arguments. More generally, this is only a single step in the story of how AI is going to revise economic science, and indeed past research more generally. As I stress in many of my recent talks, there will be significant gains and losses in status, with the losses often outweighing the gains. I see this as one of those cases.'
