I'm quite confused. In the article, the response from mathstral is also wrong???

you are not confused. >* we can conclude that:\n\n$$9.11 > 9.9$$\n\n7.* Therefore, the final answer is:\n\n$$\\boxed{9.11}$$","tool_calls":[],"role":"assistant"},"finish_reason":"stop","logprobs":null}],"usage":{"prompt_tokens":26,"completion_tokens":293,"total_tokens":319}}

> My deeper beef with this method is the complete absence of emphasizing, discovering or forming connections between cohesive things. We're trying to learn, it's a super power to start seeing patterns in what we learn, it forms buckets that we can put new concepts and information in. Without it, the learning is ... shallow.

You can make connections that give you really deep intuition; it just takes practice making cards. I wrote about it here: https://jacobgw.com/blog/tft/2024/05/12/srs-intuit.html

The Recurse Center[1] is the opposite of this. They don't take any of your income, they just help you find jobs and companies pay them to find cool people. And there is no curriculum. They believe that if people work on cool things they will learn a lot. I can't recommend it enough!

[1]: https://www.recurse.com/

RC is not a bootcamp: https://www.recurse.com/not-a-bootcamp, so it's not at all comparable to this program

Yeah I always thought RC was like a writer’s retreat… but for software.

The "no curriculum" style automatically filters for a certain kind of self learning high achieving student. This is a reasonably guarantee of success and also limits the scale of the operation.

Lambda School is more of an attempt to train the average guy who wants to increase his earning ability. He doesn't have the time or patience to "work on cool things" in the hope of "learning a lot" which is loosely correlated to finding a good job.

They cater to different crowds and solve somewhat different problems.

+1 to this. I attended RC in winter of '18. It wasn't the best fit for my personal learning style, but it's an incredible program for the right person.

I highly, highly recommend it to anyone considering going there. Some of the kindest and smartest people you'll meet.

Yes, it's great. As long as you can follow logic and a bit of programming, you'll do fine. Just go slow (I had to re-read it a bunch).

You can use incremental reading, which is built on top of spaced repetition. Lots of people have invented it independently [1] and it works amazingly! Once you get the hang of it, it changes the way you think about learning stuff.

[1] https://supermemo.guru/wiki/Michael_Nielsen_re-discovers_inc...

I'm not really sure what you mean? It's been empirically validated to predict how you remember better than alternatives (or equal to SM-17) (essentially when it predicts that your % recall is below a certain threshold, it just shows you the card)

Anki has literally changed the way I think. It's insane how I can just choose to remember anything and how I have gotten really good at creating flashcards to the point where I predict how I'm going to learn when making flashcards. It is the one thing that has easily changed my life.

I see it as a commitment, this is something I will remember for as long as I choose to. If it becomes irrelevant, I can delete the card. If it's too hard, I'll break it down into simpler things, or sometimes I even just write stuff out on paper cards that I review throughout the day. But once it's in anki, I'm committing to remembering it.

With enough scale there's no renewable power.

there are a bunch of pre-existing ones here: https://github.com/open-spaced-repetition/ > Multiple Language Support: fsrs.js, go-fsrs, rs-fsrs, py-fsrs, cljc-fsrs, swift-fsrs and ex_fsrs

Here is a question I asked about concrete examples of doing agentic things, because I think that concrete examples are necessary to expand your horizons: https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/umJmRfcJndY3Gsr36/concrete-e...