‹ BackHN Continuity

Thread

If math is more than proof, we need to better celebrate the rest of it

433 points · 285 comments · num42

  1. glimshe · · focus · HN ↗
    It would be interesting to see what would happen if we had two competing mathematical institutes, a sort of First/Second Foundations:

    1) Rejection of AI for anything but trivial applications while still using computers at their full capacity. Researchers would ensure full human understanding of proofs and methods. This Institute believes on Math as a process of discovery, Mathematicians as explorers/poets/storytellers and not proof machines.

    2) Unrestricted, all-embracing use of the latest AI, including potentially research in creating even better AIs as part of the program. These researchers would be okay with not understanding proofs if verified to be correct. This group is focused on rapid problem resolution and believes Mathematicians are theorem creators and provers.

    After X years (100?), which one would advance Mathematics and humanity the most (we'd need to define "advance")?

    1. robotpepi · · focus · HN ↗
      I don't see the point. No one is proposing a complete rejection of AI tools.
      1. glimshe · · focus · HN ↗
        Many people here most certainly are (not the majority though).
Open on Hacker News to reply ↗

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.