Thread

1. ipdashc · 1790020558 · 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 · 1790021487 · 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. 7ahGa · 1790025542 · focus · HN ↗

         As a Nobel Prize winner, I am surprised that you have not noticed how Tao and Gowers were steering everyone in the AI direction for years and now do damage control by nudging everyone to either hypothetical open models paid for by industry or the EU or sitting in a committee that "advises" OpenAI.

         No one is saying "Perelman and Wiles didn't need that silly AI and N-S was more of a counterexample". Most people imagine the sky is falling.

         What if OpenAI is stalling because they don't have 100 additional unpublished proofs as claimed?

         1. bananaflag · 1790025931 · focus · HN ↗

            > As a Nobel Prize winner, I am surprised that you have not noticed how Tao and Gowers were steering everyone in the AI direction for years

            I did notice, this is why I had thought that they had thought through the consequences. But, unfortunately, it is likely they imagined that AI would plateau somewhere around the "smart undergraduate" level and that they will stay relevant in pure problem solving.

            1. oliculipolicula · 1790050359 · focus · HN ↗

               And why have the Nobel Prize winners been silent (or taken post-Nobel bets contrary to the current consensus ie Hinton-Hassabis)?

               Taking GP at his word, I'd be more terrified if Oai had identified one hundred NEW open problems..

               In contrast with Fields Medallists, some Nobelists get the prize for something they'd eventually NOT be (in)famous for. Like Josephson. In hindsight, will it be because they found out, as young unknowns, how to explore underappreciated avenues without millions in dedicated funds (uh encouragement).. ??

               GP, did you? Get the prize for the question you are most proud of.

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.