6 ms·

It feels like a nice post. It’s almost like we’re not supposed to celebrate the fact that mathematics is accelerating.

by baby 5d ago

ComplexSystems 5d ago
I agree. I found it refreshing to get away from all of the AI drama and just enjoy the advancement in math.
- noisy_boy 5d ago
  We should enjoy the advancement. I also think the AI companies solving this or such problems with rewards shouldn't get any cash - that's the least they can do for human advancement having stolen the entirety of human knowledge and continuing to swallow never before seen amount of energy.
  - kaffekaka 5d ago
    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.
    - SiempreViernes 5d ago
      > They did not do it for the money obviously, but for the PR Doing it for the PR is still just doing it for the money, only they have a much bigger pile in mind.
gps372 5d ago
Agree! 'Problems' are getting solved and this needs to be celebrated. Wondering how this will discourage mathematicians at all, since now they have another tool to accelerate their research. Nothing is stopping them from using 'new technologies' or sticking a gun to their head to use the 'new technologies' either.
- kaffekaka 5d ago
  You mean that every mathematician can assign ten thousands Astra bots and 20 million dollars in compute to their thesis problems now?
  - gps372 5d ago
    If it works (something they need to be convinced about), if it accelerate mathematics and solve complex problems for humanity, then why not? Aren't they already using computers, mobiles, calculators, etc. already?
    - kaffekaka 5d ago
      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.
      - ButlerianJihad 5d ago
        The Star Trek future may be right on schedule. https://memory-alpha.fandom.com/wiki/World_War_III https://memory-alpha.fandom.com/wiki/World_War_III World War III was the last of Earth's three world wars, lasting from approximately 2026 to 2053. The conflict involved nuclear cataclysm as well as genocide and eco-terrorism. The post-atomic horror in the aftermath persisted as late as 2079. The war was preceded by the Eugenics Wars and the Second Civil War, all of which were sometimes regarded as parts of a single escalating conflict. It resulted in the deaths of some 30% of the Human population, at least six hundred million people, and the extinction of six hundred thousand species of animals and plants. By the end, most of the major cities had been destroyed and there were few governments left.
        fragmede 5d ago
        > some 30% of the Human population, at least six hundred million people The math nerd in me has to point out that this means there was only 2 billion humans for 30% to be 600 million (though it does say at least). Currently we have 8 billion humans on this planet or so. There must have been a culling before WWIII in their universe that they failed to mention.
skayvr 5d ago
Wait, I thought the provenance of the proof is still disputed? There's a mathematician in NY saying he used OpenAI to develop his Navier-Stokes ideas. And OpenAI's proof is suspiciously similar. At this point, how can we tell whether AI is improving or it's just reappropriating its users work? It's probably a bit of both. But still, thick milky.
- nearbuy 5d ago
  Buckmaster (the mathematician) and Alpöge used and credit AI substantially for their proof. Even if OpenAI did copy their ideas, it still wouldn't show that this didn't come from AI improving. OpenAI's proof is substantially different and I don't think anyone has claimed otherwise. The accusation is that they used the same avenue of attack, and it's an uncommon one, and that makes it suspicious that they may have taken the idea.
- pred_ 4d ago
  There are several cases of this already. Bubeck himself had to retract earlier claims of novelty, and more recently, the provenance of the non-sofic group result was brought into question. Most recently, it turn out that the construction used for Anthropic's counterexample to the Jacobian Conjecture had appeared in an unpublished but publically available draft: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49657499 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49657499 This has a few practical implications: First of all, if you are in the target group of the marketing material, be wary. While these things can do non-trivial stuff, the amount of magic is being grossly over-stated. But also, when several of the big results have indeed been reappropriating the work of others; when the companies fail to provide proper attribution (the NS case in particular is laughable) and present the results as the models' own work, that's plagiarism.

It feels like a nice post. It’s almost like we’re not supposed to celebrate the fact that mathematics is accelerating.

by baby 5d ago

It feels like a nice post. It’s almost like we’re not supposed to celebrate the fact that mathematics is accelerating.

ComplexSystems 5d ago

I agree. I found it refreshing to get away from all of the AI drama and just enjoy the advancement in math.

noisy_boy 5d ago
We should enjoy the advancement. I also think the AI companies solving this or such problems with rewards shouldn't get any cash - that's the least they can do for human advancement having stolen the entirety of human knowledge and continuing to swallow never before seen amount of energy.
- kaffekaka 5d ago
  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.
  - SiempreViernes 5d ago
    > They did not do it for the money obviously, but for the PR Doing it for the PR is still just doing it for the money, only they have a much bigger pile in mind.

gps372 5d ago

Agree! 'Problems' are getting solved and this needs to be celebrated. Wondering how this will discourage mathematicians at all, since now they have another tool to accelerate their research. Nothing is stopping them from using 'new technologies' or sticking a gun to their head to use the 'new technologies' either.

kaffekaka 5d ago
You mean that every mathematician can assign ten thousands Astra bots and 20 million dollars in compute to their thesis problems now?
- gps372 5d ago
  If it works (something they need to be convinced about), if it accelerate mathematics and solve complex problems for humanity, then why not? Aren't they already using computers, mobiles, calculators, etc. already?
  - kaffekaka 5d ago
    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.
    - ButlerianJihad 5d ago
      The Star Trek future may be right on schedule. https://memory-alpha.fandom.com/wiki/World_War_III https://memory-alpha.fandom.com/wiki/World_War_III World War III was the last of Earth's three world wars, lasting from approximately 2026 to 2053. The conflict involved nuclear cataclysm as well as genocide and eco-terrorism. The post-atomic horror in the aftermath persisted as late as 2079. The war was preceded by the Eugenics Wars and the Second Civil War, all of which were sometimes regarded as parts of a single escalating conflict. It resulted in the deaths of some 30% of the Human population, at least six hundred million people, and the extinction of six hundred thousand species of animals and plants. By the end, most of the major cities had been destroyed and there were few governments left.
      - fragmede 5d ago
        > some 30% of the Human population, at least six hundred million people The math nerd in me has to point out that this means there was only 2 billion humans for 30% to be 600 million (though it does say at least). Currently we have 8 billion humans on this planet or so. There must have been a culling before WWIII in their universe that they failed to mention.

skayvr 5d ago

Wait, I thought the provenance of the proof is still disputed? There's a mathematician in NY saying he used OpenAI to develop his Navier-Stokes ideas. And OpenAI's proof is suspiciously similar. At this point, how can we tell whether AI is improving or it's just reappropriating its users work? It's probably a bit of both. But still, thick milky.

nearbuy 5d ago
Buckmaster (the mathematician) and Alpöge used and credit AI substantially for their proof. Even if OpenAI did copy their ideas, it still wouldn't show that this didn't come from AI improving. OpenAI's proof is substantially different and I don't think anyone has claimed otherwise. The accusation is that they used the same avenue of attack, and it's an uncommon one, and that makes it suspicious that they may have taken the idea.
pred_ 4d ago
There are several cases of this already. Bubeck himself had to retract earlier claims of novelty, and more recently, the provenance of the non-sofic group result was brought into question. Most recently, it turn out that the construction used for Anthropic's counterexample to the Jacobian Conjecture had appeared in an unpublished but publically available draft: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49657499 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49657499 This has a few practical implications: First of all, if you are in the target group of the marketing material, be wary. While these things can do non-trivial stuff, the amount of magic is being grossly over-stated. But also, when several of the big results have indeed been reappropriating the work of others; when the companies fail to provide proper attribution (the NS case in particular is laughable) and present the results as the models' own work, that's plagiarism.