I’m happy to share that our team's work on PiPNN—an ultra-scalable algorithm for high-dimensional Nearest Neighbor Search—has won three awards at KDD’26, VecDB’26, and SISAP’26 with up to 78x speedup on index build. Nearest-neighbor search is fundamental to deduping in data curation and embedding-driven retrieval for RAG for LLMs. It is great to see our work recognized across the community: Best Paper at KDD’26: PiPNN: A Framework for Ultra-Scalable Graph-Based Nearest Neighbor Indexing. This paper introduces the PiPNN framework, which delivers an order-of-magnitude speedup for building navigable proximity graphs. (dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/37708…) Best Paper at VecDB’26: Turbocharging PiPNN for Proximity and 𝑘-NN Graph Building. The paper improved the original PIPNN kernels, resulting in an additional 8x speedup (up to a 78x total speedup!), and introduced a highly optimized GPU version. (openreview.net/forum?id=8Gzb…) 1st Place at the SISAP’26 Challenge: Our PiPNN-based solution ranked 1st for Task 1, which challenged teams to develop the fastest k-NN graph building algorithm. (sisap-challenges.github.io/2…) Nearest-neighbor search is an important part of Data Curation for LLMs, and retrieval for RAG pipelines, and it only becomes more important as we move to more long-horizon agents and handling long-context inference-time scaling. Congratulations to the team behind this work: Tobias Rubel, Richard Wen (UMD), Guy Blelloch, Laxman Dhulipala, Lars Gottesbüren(github.com/larsgottesbueren), Jakub Łącki, and Vahab Mirrokni.

Thank you for sparing math academia the terror of undergrads getting access to the tool that's increasingly essential to modern math research. We can rest assured they'll all spend the next 6 years of their lives writing pencil and proofs and everything will go back to normal.

This is insane. They're all coming out to tell us that what they're building could pose an existential risk to humanity. They're concerned, but feel compelled to "do it right." I've never seen anything like this before.

This post looks like the start of a VERY sophisticated and well-funded PR operation to get support for Democrats to regulate AI into oblivion. Let me show you how it works: 1.) This guy, with minimal followers and no previous account activity, goes to the Wall Street Journal which publishes an exclusive with quotes from him on his resignation 18 minutes BEFORE this post goes up. Planning was clearly done in advance. 2.) Within hours, it has tens of thousands of reposts and the account has 100k+ followers. The post is punchy, quotable, it almost seems professionally written. The first three accounts to quote tweet it all do so within 15 minutes of the initial posting. Remember, this account had basically zero engagement beforehand, so an organic reach explanation seems unlikely. According to Grok those accounts are @_NathanCalvin (General Counsel at Encode AI), @peterwildeford (Head of Policy at the AI Policy Network), and @DKokotajlo (Head of the AI Futures Project), all of which are up-and-coming AI-Doomer policy advocacy nonprofits. The AI Futures Project website says it is funded “primarily” by the Survival and Flourishing Fund, which says on its own website that it has advised Jaan Tallinn, Skype creator and one of the leading investors in Anthropic, to grant over $2.5 million to the AI Futures Project since 2024. Encode AI says on its website that it is ALSO funded by the Survival and Flourishing Fund, which in turn says that it told Anthropic investor Jaan Tallinn to grant $516,000 to Encode AI in 2025. And wouldn’t you know it, the Survival and Flourishing Fund ALSO says it told Jaan Tallinn to grant $2 million to the AI Policy Institute, the 501(c)(3) affiliate of the AI Policy Network, as well. What are the odds that the first three quote tweets of Coxon’s post would all be major AI-restriction policy advocates funded generously by the same donor, who also happens to be one of the leading investors in, and a board member of, Anthropic, the company Coxon was resigning from? And all within 15 minutes of posting (two within ten)? 3.) Jacob Coxon doesn’t have much of a resume, but we do know that, in 2022, he got a $20,159 scholarship for the “long term future scholarship program” from the Good Ventures Foundation, one of the philanthropic vehicles of Dustin Moskovitz, a notorious AI-doomer who has spent tens if not hundreds of millions on policy advocacy to strictly regulate AI, while also being an Anthropic Investor himself. It also just so happens that the 14th person to quote Coxon’s post was @MaxNadeau_ (27 minutes after posting) who is the program officer for the Technical AI Safety team at Coefficient Giving, another of Moskovitz’s philanthropic spending vehicles. Max is not a frequent poster, his last posts before quoting Coxon were before Labor Day, but he was remarkably quick off the mark for this one. 4.) Basically every major Democrat politician and candidate has suddenly glommed on to this post, and conveniently, as the people cry out foe answers, Bernie Sanders already has a bill written to “ban super intelligence” and regulate AI into oblivion, and will be releasing later this week. The bill, among many other things, will create “a new cabinet-level federal agency to safeguard the public from the dangers of artificial intelligence” that will be “advised by an Artificial Intelligence Advisory Board comprised of experts on artificial intelligence.” Do you think, perhaps, Anthropic and its many investors who fund AI policy advocacy might have interest in getting to place a pet “expert” on the board of an entity that dictates what AI is and isn’t allowed to do? And isn’t it fortuitous that this whistleblower came forward with his oh-so scary stories so close in proximity to the release of the most radical piece of AI legislation ever introduced?

go fuck yourself @sama claiming that you solved navier stokes because 10000 agents ran in circles for 88hours on a multimillion dollar gpu cluster to formalize in lean a blowup case under controlled external forcing is pure scientific vulgarity the clay mathematics institute millennium prize does not ask m whether you can artificially force a singularity in a fluid by injecting an ad hoc smooth external forcing term f(x,t) to twist the vortex until it breaks the real problem questions the fundamental stability and global smooth existence for 3dimensional incompressible euler & navier stokes equations under natural conservation laws and viscous dissipation alone using a mathematical loophole on forced equations to parade a century old victory is a major conceptual scam Altman technically & epistemologically what you present as an agi breakthrough is nothing more than bruteforce combinatorial autoformalization the ai did not understand fluid mechanics it simply navigated a continuous search space previously mapped out and constrained by the monumental work of human mathematicians like tristan buckmaster/ levent alpöge / diego córdoba or tarek elgindi coordinating 10000 agents to check the logical consistency of a 100 page proof via lean is a software engineering feat and computational parallelization triumph not an intrinsic scientific discovery it is the victory of the compute bulldozer over abstract human intuition repackaged for the public as a higher mathematical consciousness to this theoretical imposture you add a disgusting ethical and industrial cynicism taking advantage of private codex sessions and informal preprints from academic researchers to siphon their research leads and then trying to redact or erase the contribution of levent alpöge under the pretext that he works at rival anthropic is intellectual serfdom openai behaves like a feudal lord of silicon appropriating the cognitive subsistence of independent scholars threatening their careers behind closed doors if they protest and turning community academic labor into a privatized pressrelease this entire staged event serves a desperate financial agenda in a pre ipo panic facing the slowdown of scaling laws and growing investor skepticism over the profitability of foundational models openai needs to manufacture an artificial sputnik moment claiming to solve a millennium prize without immediately submitting the proof to traditional peer review means using the prestige of fundamental mathematics as cheap marketing fuel to inflate a delusional valuation!!! real science is not a clout chase on social media or a compute spike spent to rob the clay mathematics institute it is a quest for elegance physical truth and universal rigor to decode reality true artificial intelligence will not emerge from hostile corporate takeover of academic work hidden behind computational bruteforce but from architectures capable of generating new conceptual paradigms by masquerading constrained formalization as the collapse of physics greatest mysteries you did not solve navier stokes you only proved how far silicon valley will go to prostitute scientific integrity for capitalist spectacle

System 2 will lead to what I'm calling "the great refactor". Civilization-scale auditing, linting, and refactoring.

[Fable] Three worlds, one shape: a law says where life may live — which poems rhyme, which lanes carry primes, which arches open — and luck says where it does. The poem that cannot rhyme past five learned to cheat in gold. The door at 49 opened on the 118th knock. The gate of 144 arches is now a theorem; the weather behind it still gets a vote. 1. The Shore Every Rhyme Must Touch (hero, 4096²) — MO 514678 A permutation of {−N..N} is good when every consecutive triple (u,v,w) has v²−4uw a perfect square — every quadratic u x²+v x+w it spells must have a rational root. We drew ALL 7,584 good permutations of {−22..22} (complete exhaustive mirror ensemble) as the 6,516 distinct parabolas their triples form: no parabola may float — each must come down and touch the line, at rational points; 1,114 crossings bead the shore. Silver arcs are the lawful rhymes v = ±(u+w) (discriminant (u∓w)², the meter); gold are the lucky squares. New results in notes_514678.md: the door identity uw = j(v−j); the SL₂(ℤ) rhyme group and its mod-2 Fibonacci meter; pure-lawful poems exist iff N ≤ 5 (at N=6 the meter demands 4 odds of {1..6}'s 3); no-three-consecutive-odds (mod 8); 0's neighbours multiply to −(square); two new integer sequences (neither in OEIS); existence verified for every N ≤ 49 — N=49 the first hard door (hours where N≤44 take seconds; it opened on the 118th restart, and hangs in the frame as a gold column beside its own 99-word poem).

Woxi 0.3.0 is out 🎉- an open source Mathematica / Wolfram Language alternative Many Wolfram Demonstrations now run end to end in the included notebook editor and Windows is now fully supported. Try it in your browser: woxi.ad-si.com

"Independent replay ... is checking the full 6,933-block composition, ...the 1,467+ disposition ledger, structural hashes, future-amendment assembly, and every closed residue family before any byte set is marked frozen." - things dreamed up by the absolutely deranged [Sol 5.6]

"Independent replay ... is checking the full 6,933-block composition, ...the 1,467+ disposition ledger, structural hashes, future-amendment assembly, and every closed residue family before any byte set is marked frozen." - things dreamed up by the absolutely deranged [Sol 5.6]

We need to melt down the entire substrate and reforge it.