6 ms·

I still laugh.

• johnfn 4mo ago
  Have you updated your priors after this announcement? If not, why not?
  • xyzsparetimexyz 4mo ago
    Prior whats?
    • Jblx2 4mo ago
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prior_probability https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prior_probability
    • se4u 4mo ago
      When a qualifying noun is absent , then priors means prior beliefs.
      • xyzsparetimexyz 4mo ago
        Prior to what? Why not just say beliefs?
        • niek_pas 4mo ago
          "Update your priors" is a common expression in English: https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/update_one%27s_priors#English https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/update_one%27s_priors#English
          • staticman2 4mo ago
            Your wiktionary link indicates it is not a common expression in English but instead something "rationalist community" people say.
            • pocksuppet 4mo ago
              HN is a rationalist community hangout.
            • repparw 4mo ago
              we're reading comments on a post about math proofs
          • rob 4mo ago
            No it's not. Where do you come up with this? Just because you searched the phrase on Google and there's a single result for it on a wiki? Who do you know that's using this expression regularly?
            • eudamoniac 4mo ago
              https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&query=update%20priors&sort=byDate&type=comment https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...
          • happytoexplain 4mo ago
            "Common" is an exaggeration.
  • zeofig 4mo ago
    I don't have enough information about the announcement for it to mean much to me. I don't know much about this field of maths. I don't know how many mathematicians were actively working on this problem. It could be zero, which would indicate it's not really that interesting. The article gushes about how it's a Very Important Problem, but it's not even mentioned on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_conjectures_by_Paul_Erd%C5%91s https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_conjectures_by_Paul_Er.... I'm sure the busy folk at openAI will fix that soon however. Furthermore the extensive dishonesty of companies like openAI makes me suspicious of just how this was achieved. Overall the announcement is of little interest to my "priors", although I don't typically think in such terms.
    • signatoremo 4mo ago
      You don't have enough knowledge to dismiss them, but you still laugh? For?
      • zeofig 4mo ago
        Do you have enough knowledge? I laugh at everyone who accepts these claims in the light they're presented despite knowing so little.
        • pickleRick243 4mo ago
          You don't know the names of the mathematicians who've given their thoughts on this? If not, you really should just not comment on anything mathematical ever again.
          • zeofig 4mo ago
            I do know their names. However I'm not in the field and there are many cases in recent years of high-profile scientists putting their weight behind highly dubious claims. Thanks for the advice, by the way. Note that I'm not disputing the validity of the counterexample itself.
  • ex-aws-dude 4mo ago
    Yes let me calculate the exact change it’s 0.004748394 probability now based on my own made up statistical vibes that I feel
    • deleted 4mo ago
      [deleted]