fewer recessions, more regressions / tweets reflect the opinion of you & your institution
Washington, DC
Joined August 2023
- Tweets6.4K
- Following1.8K
- Followers1.3K
- Likes34.9K
quant retweeted
There is something beautiful here. Dual screens are great but they just can’t match this aesthetic.
For a long while I wanted to be what some of my heroes are: economics professors, writing insightful papers that push the needle forward on our understanding of the field and how we might choose better policies.
I’m not sure this world or such figures will exist as they do now
I’m open to the possibility that this is entirely a personal flaw, but I’ll be forthcoming and state that rapid capabilities progress has not been good for my intellectual ambitions. There is little reason to think models will not soon one-shot better essays or papers than I could ever write. Yes, there is still much inherent value in learning, but if this is true, it must be the case that this value is far, far lower than in the past.
The implications of some very weak form of AGI, the bar just being that we solve writing and novel research, is a world in which writing (and perhaps speaking) about complex ideas is just so much less valuable than in a world without it. It feels like I will go the way of a horse.
I’m open to the possibility that this is entirely a personal flaw, but I’ll be forthcoming and state that rapid capabilities progress has not been good for my intellectual ambitions. There is little reason to think models will not soon one-shot better essays or papers than I could ever write. Yes, there is still much inherent value in learning, but if this is true, it must be the case that this value is far, far lower than in the past.
The implications of some very weak form of AGI, the bar just being that we solve writing and novel research, is a world in which writing (and perhaps speaking) about complex ideas is just so much less valuable than in a world without it. It feels like I will go the way of a horse.
I think this is the wrong question. Anyone, including mathematicians, can pursue understanding when it’s fruitful, and forgo it when it’s not.
The question is whether receiving terse mathematical results from AI that are difficult to work through is, on the whole, a bad thing.
I find this philosophical debate mesmerising. Is “understanding” important for science or should it ”just work”.
In the past, understanding was critical in order to make further innovations/stand on the shoulders of giants.
But has AI changed that?
My own view is that understanding is key. But I also acknowledge that time might prove me wrong.
Yes, econometrics = midwit. On the other hand, it’s very high-minded to assume her whole body of work is a cynical corporate ploy. (Also if you read the tweet it’s obvious it’s not her paper)
Sane econ twitter must return. What are we doing here?
“bad instruments are because DEI”💔🥀
