Thread

1. hatthew · 1790903353 · focus · HN ↗

   My comment about humanity's last exam being a misnomer is included, and I proposed better ideas about what a last exam could look like. One of the things I said was "solve an open math problem" which has conclusively been done with Navier-Stokes (regardless of the controversy surrounding that). However, in the spirit of clarifying the goalposts, AI has only passed 1/6 of the tests I proposed. 17% is not a passing grade, so I'd say no, my challenge has not been met.

   Another thing to note is that the (presumably AI-generated) summary of my challenge does not accurately represent what I wrote, listing only half the things I said and saying "or" rather than "and".

   1. an0malous · 1790942234 · focus · HN ↗

      How can you say it’s conclusively been done if it might have been stolen from a math researcher and was aided in unknown ways by a whole team of math researchers? I find it mind boggling that HN just accepts these shenanigans with no transparency. At the very least, they could share the conversation / thinking trace easily and if their claims are true there shouldn’t be anything controversial or negative for their company in the trace.

      1. olmo23 · 1790948160 · focus · HN ↗

         navier stokes is not the only example of an open problem in maths that was solved by AI (eg the counterexample to the jacobian)

         1. tsunamifury · 1790950409 · focus · HN ↗

            In the other hand why does anyone find it surprising at all that a computer solved a math problem.

            1. stronglikedan · 1790953198 · focus · HN ↗

               Because up until then, computers had not solved math problems. Humans solved them, often using computers as a tool.

               1. tsunamifury · 1790957025 · focus · HN ↗

                  I'm pretty sure computers have been solving math problems for a very very long time through various techniques.

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.