The authors are absolutely not saying "we are totally safe". They are not denying that AI will affect math deeply in the short and the long run.
[dead]
The OpenAI staff kindly corrected the LLMs naive tries at solving NS? Impressive staff I must say.
The tools would come from trying to solve NS, not from knowing it is true/false.
> Second, for us non-mathematicians, the value of math isn't in understanding exactly why a result is true, it’s in how those results can be applied to actually improve our lives. This is just the problem with the…
You have a point, but I think a concern is that the environment in which to fill this gap is threatened since the unsolved problems have functioned as a guiding lighthouse and measure of progress. Frankly: will someone…
The issue is that now that Navier-Stokes is "solved", the amount of resources put into researching it will be reduced, meaning that the insights and knowledge that would have come out of even failed attempts will never…
Advanced studies give you more general skills than just the subject you study. You become more generally intelligent and appreciate the world differently. This is a very good feeling and valuable on a personal level.…
Yes. In the best possible world AI could enable a much better future, but currently we are on a quite bad trajectory.
Yes, but a big part of the problem right now is that two big labs have monopoly on the resources and they for sure are not working for the benefit of mankind. The Startrek future is still a long way out.
I agree. Technological advances can lead to a better world for sure, but I think many people underestimate the human need to create and to find meaning in their work. If AI can do superhuman math that allows better…
FWIW I think OpenAI have stated they will not claim the award. They did not do it for the money obviously, but for the PR, that much everyone must agree on.
You mean that every mathematician can assign ten thousands Astra bots and 20 million dollars in compute to their thesis problems now?
But finding a spoon (really?) is binary - you have the spoon or not. But understanding a complex situation is nuanced and contains different perspectives, tradeoffs, context etc. Surely you are not comparing finding a…
> But you can’t have all things at once: you can’t move at speed with AI, collaborate effectively, and understand what is going on as an expert would. It is not physically possible for a human brain. Very well put. You…
A typical example is when discussing some issue where there is no clear right or wrong. Architectural decisions for example. Then it is easy to use an LLM to produce arguments for your opinion. It is also easy to do…
Partially true, but only partially. It also makes people believe they understand more than they do, because every answer comes so easily to them. But the LLMs are easily steered and tend to agree with what you want them…
Worth sitting with.
Not the least in the sense that to know something well _and also_ be able to explain it well is worth so much more than to just be an expert
In math (and other subjects too of course) many things simply cannot be understood without deep prior knowledge. I came across the Wikipedia page for the modularity theorem a while ago and it reads truly satirical to…
Not if your boss tells you to generate code like your life depended on it.
Could not help thinking about the Simpsons truck truck truck: https://youtu.be/5coythRANLA
Saab made great cars and is part of core childhood for all swedes age 40+.
For now you can choose whether to share the sessions, but we all know that from now on the session transcript must be kept clean and presentable in case at some later time it is made public. The session is from now on a…
My bad! I thought you were commenting on the article, did not realize you replied to a comment. Sorry!
The authors are absolutely not saying "we are totally safe". They are not denying that AI will affect math deeply in the short and the long run.
[dead]
The OpenAI staff kindly corrected the LLMs naive tries at solving NS? Impressive staff I must say.
The tools would come from trying to solve NS, not from knowing it is true/false.
> Second, for us non-mathematicians, the value of math isn't in understanding exactly why a result is true, it’s in how those results can be applied to actually improve our lives. This is just the problem with the…
You have a point, but I think a concern is that the environment in which to fill this gap is threatened since the unsolved problems have functioned as a guiding lighthouse and measure of progress. Frankly: will someone…
The issue is that now that Navier-Stokes is "solved", the amount of resources put into researching it will be reduced, meaning that the insights and knowledge that would have come out of even failed attempts will never…
Advanced studies give you more general skills than just the subject you study. You become more generally intelligent and appreciate the world differently. This is a very good feeling and valuable on a personal level.…
Yes. In the best possible world AI could enable a much better future, but currently we are on a quite bad trajectory.
Yes, but a big part of the problem right now is that two big labs have monopoly on the resources and they for sure are not working for the benefit of mankind. The Startrek future is still a long way out.
I agree. Technological advances can lead to a better world for sure, but I think many people underestimate the human need to create and to find meaning in their work. If AI can do superhuman math that allows better…
FWIW I think OpenAI have stated they will not claim the award. They did not do it for the money obviously, but for the PR, that much everyone must agree on.
You mean that every mathematician can assign ten thousands Astra bots and 20 million dollars in compute to their thesis problems now?
But finding a spoon (really?) is binary - you have the spoon or not. But understanding a complex situation is nuanced and contains different perspectives, tradeoffs, context etc. Surely you are not comparing finding a…
> But you can’t have all things at once: you can’t move at speed with AI, collaborate effectively, and understand what is going on as an expert would. It is not physically possible for a human brain. Very well put. You…
A typical example is when discussing some issue where there is no clear right or wrong. Architectural decisions for example. Then it is easy to use an LLM to produce arguments for your opinion. It is also easy to do…
Partially true, but only partially. It also makes people believe they understand more than they do, because every answer comes so easily to them. But the LLMs are easily steered and tend to agree with what you want them…
Worth sitting with.
Not the least in the sense that to know something well _and also_ be able to explain it well is worth so much more than to just be an expert
In math (and other subjects too of course) many things simply cannot be understood without deep prior knowledge. I came across the Wikipedia page for the modularity theorem a while ago and it reads truly satirical to…
Not if your boss tells you to generate code like your life depended on it.
Could not help thinking about the Simpsons truck truck truck: https://youtu.be/5coythRANLA
Saab made great cars and is part of core childhood for all swedes age 40+.
For now you can choose whether to share the sessions, but we all know that from now on the session transcript must be kept clean and presentable in case at some later time it is made public. The session is from now on a…
My bad! I thought you were commenting on the article, did not realize you replied to a comment. Sorry!