> what do you want to defend

Accuracy, and in this case people correctly knowing that their rights stem from some source (if they do! I don’t know the legal facts) or knowing the appropriate venue in which to campaign for them, rather than incorrectly believing that they don’t have rights and/or can’t get them.

> why do you want to defend it

Because words still have meanings, and people pretending they don’t, while screaming in ever more shrill tones at each other, is extremely tiresome, and the Internet is full of it.

> what are exactly rules, which could be separate topic of research, this detail is skipped

I am now confident you’re a troll, though, so I am going to bow out.

I mean this quite seriously: have you considered reading any first course in set theory?

Toy proof-of-concept: Anthropic owns a secret key which is a coin-flip Bernoulli random variable K with p=1/2. You are paying Anthropic to give you X, a Bernoulli random variable with p=1/2. Anthropic changes from their old strategy, "draw from K, then throw it away and flip a coin, each time you ask for a sample", to their new strategy, "draw from K and send it to you". You cannot observe the difference, but Anthropic knows K and so they know when you are repeating its outputs. (Obviously this is a toy example; in reality the distribution is vastly more complicated than Bernoulli, and Anthropic isn't just storing some model outputs to use as K but instead is computing a correlation with a known pseudorandomness source.)

G-Research is a leading quant finance company. Big compute farm, interesting problems.

My team is hiring senior engineers to work on our (actually world class) DAG scheduling infra for distributing research and production workloads across the compute farm. What we do is roughly:

* maintain and improve the SDKs for that scheduler in Python, F#, and C#

* add interesting new features to the scheduler itself

* maintain and improve a web backend and UI for quants and engineers to monitor their jobs, increasingly with high availability requirements

* translate bidirectionally at the business level between low-level infra providers and quant/ML researchers

Some functional experience preferred, because our core product is in F#. Lots of dealing with very smart researchers and engineers, with the kind of fun problems arising when you run large ML workloads at scale.

patrick.stevens@gresearch.co.uk or my personal patrick+hackernews@patrickstevens.co.uk

But there are things for which you can't even say "let 'this thing' be…". For example, ZF proves that there are uncountably many reals. There are only countably many names, so there must be unnameable reals. You can talk about "generic" reals (you can say "let x be a real" and do all sorts of interesting things with a generic x), but there are specific reals you will never be able to name specifically enough to distinguish them from their uncountably-many brethren. That doesn't make them "vague, undefined or ephemeral"! They're just so numerous that you can't describe the distinctions between them.

(Even hardcore constructivists usually accept enough Choice to prove the reals uncountable, although https://arxiv.org/abs/2404.01256 made headlines when it was shown not to be necessarily true.)