The main person behind TeXmacs, Joris van der Hoeven, is also a coauthor on this paper:

"Integer multiplication in time n(log n)" https://annals.math.princeton.edu/2021/193-2/p04

Said paper in html rendered by texmacs [1] and past discussion [2]

1: https://www.texmacs.org/joris/ffnlogn/ffnlogn.html

2: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24991447

I had no idea the CoCo 3 was good until I watched this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r2Tq8jdS6mY

The AI would assign a score for each post/comment that looks like a vote count in the reddit UI and would be treated as a vote count when performing the various kinds of rankings that Reddit supports.

I would label that "scoring", not "voting".

But if we ignore semantics for a moment, yours is a testable hypothesis.

> reward originality, clarity, kindness, strong evidence, or creative thinking, and to downvote low effort posts, repetition, hostility, or bad faith arguments.

However, I think there are better ways to improve contributions than taking away the ability for other humans to express explicit judgment on someone's post without also having to write something.

For instance, perhaps the UI where you add your post can do real-time evaluation and suggestions for improvement (e.g. pointing out snark, personal attacks, etc.). That gives the poster the opportunity to make a different decision of what to write.

One trap with your model worth considering is that if the AI gets things wrong (e.g. gives you a negative count because it thinks you're not kind or don't give a sufficiently substantiated rebuttal in your argument), it will be very frustrating for participants and they will blame the board, not other users (who are free to disagree).

Like LaTeX, Typst is Turing-complete, which prevents flawless imports in other tools.

What you want is a document format that is not Turing complete, such as the TeXmacs document format.

Professional jargon isn't Turing-complete like LaTeX is.

LaTeX is a programming language. Any attempt to refine english to act like a programming language will just result in a new programming language.

LaTeX being a programming language makes it a bad idea for typesetting documents.

I don't see how that follows at all. But LaTeX seems to disprove the notion, since it is, in fact, very good for typesetting documents.

Why should it be acceptable to make flawless translation to other formats impossible for LaTeX if you wouldn't want to do the same for English?

I don't understand your question.

I mean it would be rude to use a natural language that cannot be translated accurately to other languages. So why isn't it rude to use LaTeX to write documents given that LaTeX is Turing complete and cannot be translated flawlessly to other document formats?

If it's a good idea to use a computational typesetting language — namely TeX/LaTeX, then maybe it is a good idea to make English computational also.

I mean why would you want English, a dreadful and ugly language, to be universal?

Disclosure: English is my native language.

Because it is good enough, widely used, and would make communication easier worldwide.

It isn't good enough. There's far too much ambiguity and imprecision inherent in the language. Just look at how often it is that native English speakers misunderstand each other.

To make English (or any human language) suitable for use as a programming language means you need to very tightly constrain the language -- which would make it less suitable for human communications.

Maybe they should stop giving advice that appears to be racial profiling to some people.

Do those religious traditions that prescribe burial also require physical headstones instead of virtual ones?

In some cities, they might be hard to avoid seeing.

Well, that would be a landscaping/architectural misdesign that can be corrected without adversely affecting the graveyard. And should be. If you're going to the graveyard to honor your dead, you shouldn't have to look at the rest of the city while you're there.

So what?

Why should you impose your philosophy of death on other people?

Nobody is imposing anything, feel free to ignore my philosophy of death which I like to call reality.