Scott Aaronson said he's changed his mind on P=NP and thinks civilization will need to be rebuilt from scratch very soon as a result.
>>17082341Scott Aaronson is a stupid fucking asshole.
It took some time to show him their were serious flaws with the many worlds theory.
>>17082341>Aaronson
>>17082343yes>Shtetl Optimizedreminder that even in the Ashkenazi community 100 years ago the people living on Shtetls in Eastern Europe were viewed as backward, superstitious idiots
>>17082369Such as?
>>17082398Gen. George S. Patton described them as being a bunch of dirty degenerates who stank
>>17082341Scott Aaronson wanted to castrate himself so that he would stop feeling sexually attracted to his female colleagues.
>>17082410Just like many cult leaders (picrel is Do, Herff Applewhite, of Heaven’s Gate, the Hale-Bopp UFO suicide cult, who did exactly that)
>>17082400I'm talking funny, sorry. I'm watching op's right now.
Scott Aaronson has said he thinks the chance of P=NP is now 5%.https://scottaaronson.blog/?p=10239#comment-2042428
>>17082341*yawn*i will give a million dollars to anyone who can prove to me that this "problem" has any practical relevance whatsoever
>>17082341>deranged kike said a thingWhere's the science/math? Clean it up, jannie.
>>17082412>the Hale-Bopp UFO suicide cultlearned about that recently>19 people swallowed pills washed down with vodka, laid in bunk beds with sheets over their head waiting to die, all in complete silence, all over an incorrect telescope imagekek what fucking bitches
>>17082574Ah. Extradimensional Sciences KnowHow, Also Making WayHow. As it Stands For NonPolynomial. So Perhaps Someone Can Deduce Which Dimensional Number. That That Becomes That Correctness.
>>17082574P=/=NP is a quite relevant problem unlike a lot of others. It basically asking if computation is optional or not. However despite lacking a proof it is not really. 50:50 thing. There's like 99% chance P is not NP, it is the type of thing where we have had lots of attempts to solve it but also lots of optimization attempts which could have proven it by accident.for instance if you were a PhD student solving an obscure but but mappable to polynomial time problem and you accidentally optimized on layer too far one that may have proven P=NP. It ties into optimization something every computer scientist has been exploring of generations, even programmers without rigorous comp sci backgrounds. I think a more likely resolution to P vs NP will be more like the set theory crisis with Russel's paradox where we will have to admit there is a substantial portion of polynomial space we don't understand very well but there is a subset of P which can be made much more rigorous and encompass everything we care about in such a way people will wonder why we cared about p v np at all.
>>17082620>kek what fucking bitchesaka a religion with few members
>>17082574That is kind of subjective so it depends on if being able to encrypt your information and have your bank accounts and other personal info protected by encryption seem practically relevant whatsoever. If someone secretly figured out P=NP, they could just take the million dollars from your bank and they wouldn't have to "prove" anything to you.
>>17083036>they won’t publish>they would just empty Binance in 20 minutesKek.
>>17083036if runtime grows as a billion-degree polynomial it would still be infeasible
