Thread

1. bluepeter · 1790086853 · focus · HN ↗

   OpenAI solving all these math/etc problems (reportedly 100 coming) is both impressive and insanely unimpressive. Unimpressive because to me it sorta signals that OpenAI has nothing better to be working on than obscure mathematical curios?

   1. dgritsko · 1790086951 · focus · HN ↗

      Your comment implies that this is all that they're working on, which does not seem substantiated.

      1. glub · 1790087746 · focus · HN ↗

         It seems like OpenAI's takeaway after Sora is to not stretch themselves thin and focus on what's important.

         Based on what's publically available, they're focusing on hacking uncontesting orgs using misconfigured sandboxes and math puzzles.

         Your statement is essentially unfalsifiable. We can't possibly discuss whatever Sam Altman is doing in his private office room, nor should we assume OpenAI is working on anything other than what has some public traces.

         1. anthonyrstevens · 1790182370 · focus · HN ↗

            >> nor should we assume OpenAI is working on anything other than what has some public traces

            Using that reasoning, I am only thinking about whatever comes out of my mouth or gets typed on my keyboard, and nothing else. Ludicrous on its face.

            1. glub · 1790182707 · focus · HN ↗

               You can't work on anything in an organization as large as, and with as many eyes on as OpenAI/Anthropic without it becoming publicly known very quickly.
   2. jjjee · 1790087100 · focus · HN ↗

      Correct.

      There are many things I want to do - that would require me to hire a team of 50 people.

      I don’t want to do that nor can I afford to. Can OAI focus on enabling me to do this? I don’t care about this other stuff.

      Just like many things in life - if it doesn’t show up in the economy it’s irrelevant.

      1. subw00f · 1790087534 · focus · HN ↗

         Like what?
   3. Mattrou · 1790087152 · focus · HN ↗

      Nothing in TFA seems to imply that this was solved by OpenAI. This looks like an independant researcher.
   4. yitchelle · 1790087343 · focus · HN ↗

      well, you could say that for plenty of academic research but their value is usually not obvious at the start.
   5. iforgotmypasswo · 1790087382 · focus · HN ↗

      Consider that their internal use of AI is likely pretty math and science heavy.

      I think the publicity is a nice to have. They need models like this for in-house use.

      Technically, this isn’t OpenAI directly.

      1. bluepeter · 1790088655 · focus · HN ↗

         My bad on the origin of this. Still, we saw a recent rumor that they've solved another 100 inscrutable math problems. I'd say their N-S announcement did not result in positive publicity at all. In fact, quite the opposite, and may be the direct cause of the dozens of Fields medal winners penning their "slow AI" letter.
   6. chorsestudios · 1790087419 · focus · HN ↗

      Attempting to solve & solving open math problems probably is a good benchmark for comparing models and gauging model progression. A lot of useful info is obtained like time needed to solve the problems, identifying when not to chase dead ends, thought processes & logic steps, etc.
   7. prodigycorp · 1790087462 · focus · HN ↗

      Disagree. We are at the point where coming up with good evals for these models is extremely difficult. Solving unsolved math problems is a valid way of evaluating model progress and somewhat necessary to understand how far the current crop of models can go.
   8. amelius · 1790087557 · focus · HN ↗

      No it signals that they can do few things very well. And among those few things are those math puzzles.

      I think they should now focus on robotics, so it can do my dishes while I work on fun math games.

      1. pixl97 · 1790088115 · focus · HN ↗

         >I think they should now focus on robotics

         why would they compete with Nvidia on that?

      2. ieiej · 1790089170 · focus · HN ↗

         We already have dish washers bud.

         There’s this bizarre lesson that humanity is gona learn - much of life in many respects is already automated. And that small % of what is non-automated will be kept to have some semblance of feeling human and useful.

         There’s already a lot of fake jobs and output of zero value - nobody bats an eyelid.

         1. sfn42 · 1790093257 · focus · HN ↗

            The dish washer neither fills nor empties itself. Personally I'd pay an obscene amount of money to never have to sort my socks again.

            1. amelius · 1790095685 · focus · HN ↗

               Do what I do: buy only socks of 1 kind.

               1. fragmede · 1790105520 · focus · HN ↗

                  You still gotta deal with them though.

                  1. madaxe_again · 1790144014 · focus · HN ↗

                     Just buy new socks every day. Use paper crockery. Job done.
         2. brainwad · 1790094427 · focus · HN ↗

            But we're on the hedonic treadmill, so the loading/unloading of the dishwasher feels like maximal effort to people who've never lived without one. Same with all the other automations in our lives, people just can't imagine life without refrigeration or plumbing or motor vehicles.
   9. adsmit14 · 1790088528 · focus · HN ↗

      That's silly. I'm sure calculus was considered obscure when Newton developed it -- time is what's needed to judge if something is useful or not.

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.