Thread

1. youoy · 1789812208 · focus · HN ↗

   Part of the controversy here is that now the skill advantage that some Field Medalist had is much narrower. The fact that fields medals have an age limit implies that it favors brain power over understanding. And that was the guiding light award of the community. So i find it "funny" (and natural) when they are offended by AI. That is the main "crisis" of mathematics.

   In my opinion there has never been a better time to be a mathematitian, and there has never been a better time to be a software builder.

   But there has never been a worst time to have the need to prove your economic value as a mathematitian or software developer alone. Because "understanding" is not something you can prove in one afternoon, its something that you prove with a life.

   1. sweezyjeezy · 1789813173 · focus · HN ↗

      > In my opinion there has never been a better time to be a mathemetician...

      As an ex-mathematician I assure you this is very wrong, and every working mathematician I know right now is completely miserable, and/or trying to flee the field as fast as possible. It's like telling a chair-maker during the industrial revolution that there had never been a better time for them, since now they could operate chair-making machines instead of toiling away at the wood themselves. It assumes that they were purely in it for their passion for mass-producing chairs. The majority of mathematicians get into the field because they love problem solving, and the gauntlet thrown down by challenging math tasks.

      Many parts of this will never be useful for society on a grander scale - but this is reflected in the finances - pure math is closer in funding-terms to a humanity than to hard science. Now even this is _massively_ under threat, and Tao and co need to pivot quickly to stop this from becoming a bloodbath.

      1. soVeryTired · 1789813973 · focus · HN ↗

         Probably true for the dedicated problem solvers (of which Tao is one IMO). But I doubt there's ever been a better time to be a theory builder (more like Peter Scholze, or Grothendieck).

         Some up with an idea and leave the system to check it 15 different ways, and see whether you can simplify an existing body of theory. It'd be like having an army of lightning-fast grad students.

         1. nilkn · 1789862116 · focus · HN ↗

            This is coming next. There's nothing particularly special about theory building. Successful theory building is always oriented towards solving a problem, because otherwise even humans can easily spam out a bunch of nonsense. This is a real problem that the math community has experienced on multiple occasions pre-AI. I'd go further and say that theory building is irrelevant if it doesn't help solve problems people care about.

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.