‹ BackHN Continuity

Thread

The Advisory Group on Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence

162 points · 87 comments · digital55

  1. ipdashc · · focus · HN ↗
    I knew mathematicians were a smart bunch, but honestly, the events of the past few weeks have really given me a new level of respect for them.

    They might be the first community I've seen to experience the AI "rush" and (at least as presented to an outside observer) immediately come together, assess the situation, and calmly, empathetically, and rationally act. They evaluated what AI is good at and what it lacks. They've thought through how it'll likely affect their field in the future. They've explained where the need for humans still lies, and made clear proposals for how to change their own field and for what demands to make of AI companies. Of course they're not all on the same page, but they're at least talking and trying.

    They haven't started worshipping the machine god and loudly claiming their whole field is solved. Nor have they flailed wildly at LLMs as if complaining enough about it will make them go away.

    Every major statement I've seen come out of the math community on this matter reads as well thought-through, humble, reasoned, and deeply human.

    In these days of fear, uncertainty, and obsolescence anxiety, honestly, they've given me some confidence that maybe we will figure this stuff out after all. Maybe we'll learn from them. Who knows.

    1. bananaflag · · focus · HN ↗
      > I knew mathematicians were a smart bunch, but honestly, the events of the past few weeks have really given me a new level of respect for them.

      As a mathematician, I am a bit disappointed by my (admittedly illustrious) colleagues.

      I get the need to take it slowly (and I am a quite impatient person, so I shouldn't get to decide stuff like this), but everything said feels a bit too sour grapes for my taste.

      Ok, maybe AI did not solve the field (I believe it will, btw), maybe there is a need for human "understanding", but:

      1) They don't seem to consider even the possibility (not the certainty) that they might be wrong, that math as we know it is gone, and we cannot "adapt"

      2) They seem to have been oblivious all these years about AI eventually reaching this point (at least I personally wasn't, I predicted this stage back in 2018)

      1. Davidzheng · · focus · HN ↗
        I think I'm mostly on your side (also I believed early it would get here), but what does it mean to "solve the field"? I'm pretty much as bullish as you get on AI but I'm sure I can come up with questions AI cannot solve. I think the space of problems in math is so large and the distribution of proof lengths so heavy-tailed, there's probably no way without dyson-sphereing the sun to solve all easy to state problems.
Open on Hacker News to reply ↗

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.