Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Terence Tao on O1

mathstodon.xyz

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

401–410 of 527 posts

Re: Terence Tao on O1

#401

Post by mjburgess »

sterlind wrote: post #284
wenc wrote: post #5

Once GPT is tuned more heavily on Lean (proof assistant) -- the way it is on Python -- I expect its usefulness for research level math to increase. I work in a field related to operations research (OR), and ChatGPT 4o has ingested enough of the OR literature that it's able to spit out very useful Mixed Integer Programming (MIP) formulations for many "problem shapes". For instance, I can give it a logic problem like "…

I also do OR-adjacent work, but I've had much less luck using 4o for formulating MIPs. It tends to deliver correct-looking answers with handwavy explanations of the math, but the equations don't work and the reasoning doesn't add up. It's a strange experience, like taking a math class where the proofs are weird and none of the lessons click for you, and you start feeling stupid, only to learn your professor is an esc…

Yip. We need research into how long it takes experts to repair faulty answers, vs. generate them on their own.

Benchmarking 10,000 attempts on an IQ test is irrelevant if on most of those attempts the time taken to repair an answer is long than the time to complete the test yourself.

I find its useful to generate examplars in areas you're roughly familiar with, but want to see some elaboration or a refresher. You can stich it all together to get further, but when it comes time to actually build/etc. something -- you need to start from scratch.

The time taken to reporduce what it's provided, now that you understand it, is trivial compared to the time needed to repair its flaws.

Re: Terence Tao on O1

#402

Post by dtquad »

agumonkey wrote: post #85
wenc wrote: post #5

Once GPT is tuned more heavily on Lean (proof assistant) -- the way it is on Python -- I expect its usefulness for research level math to increase. I work in a field related to operations research (OR), and ChatGPT 4o has ingested enough of the OR literature that it's able to spit out very useful Mixed Integer Programming (MIP) formulations for many "problem shapes". For instance, I can give it a logic problem like "…

side question, are there good OR websites / platforms (reddit, mastodon) to get involved in the field ?

Most OR researchers and practitioners are on Mastodon.

Re: Terence Tao on O1

#403

Post by sgt101 »

adt wrote: post #79
sgt101 wrote: post #36

Is there a list of discoveries or siginficant works/constructions made by people collaborating with LLM's? I mean as opposed to specific deep networks like Alphafold or Graphcast?

I'd like to see that, too. I have a related list of GPT accomplishments here: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1kc262HZSMAWI6FVsh0zJ...

Super spreadsheet - very useful. Thank you for doing the work and sharing.

Re: Terence Tao on O1

#404

Post by HarHarVeryFunny »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #246
fnordpiglet wrote: post #149

Rewind your mind to 2019 and imagine reading a post that said “The experience seemed roughly on par with trying to advise a mediocre, but not completely incompetent, graduate student.” With regard to interacting with the equivalent of Alexa. That’s a remarkable difference in 5 years.

The first profession AI seems on track to decimate is programming. In particular, the brilliant but remote and individual contributor. There is an obvious conflict of interest in this forum.

The programmers who will find LLMs most useful are going to be those who prior to LLMs were copying and pasting from Stack Overflow, and asking questions online about everything they were doing - tasks that LLMs have precisely replaced (it has now memorized all that boilerplate code, consensus answers, and API usage examples).

The developers who will find LLMs the least useful are the "brilliant" ones who never found any utility in any of that stuff, partly because they are not reinventing the wheel for the 1000th time, but instead addressing more challenging and novel problems.

Re: Terence Tao on O1

#405

Post by mewpmewp2 »

homebrewer wrote: post #381
mewpmewp2 wrote: post #279

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which language?

Same experience, but with TypeScript and Go. They gave me a 60-day trial (IIRC), I used it for two days, disabled it for the next 58 days, and after that removed it from the editor.

I get really good results with TypeScript and Python. Like it knows exactly what I want to do, I feel like I think exactly as Copilot does. Maybe I am the statistical average...

Makes me wonder if people who don't like Copilot output will not like my natural output as well.

Re: Terence Tao on O1

#406

Post by buddhistdude »

Davidzheng wrote: post #286
asdasjhG wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The "value of a degree" means the employment prospects for the degree holder. Which is going to zero if the optimistic predictions are correct, so the optimistic professors should warn their students. I understand the motivation for pure math quite well. It is about beauty, understanding things and discovering things for oneself. If computers do the work, the discovery part is gone and pure math is ruined. For the no…

do you also value your personal relationships based on employment prospects?

not fully related to what the parent is saying, but I need to get this off my chest:

isn't this development obviously going to result in the deprecation of the value of the human intellect to near-zero? which is the thing that virtually all people on this platform base their livelihood on?

there's such a deafening silence around this topic on the internet where there should be - i don't know what but not this silence. we don't know what to do right? and we're avoiding this topic.

with this version they broke the assumed wall of llms's developed that was the last copium that we could believe in. the wall is broken and now it's just a matter of time until your capacity to think will be completely unneeded. the machine will do it more accurately and more quickly by orders of magnitude.

am I a doomer? I was in the home country of my parents recently, that is completely dysfunctional and war is on the verge of breaking out. what I learned there is that humans stay ignorant of great dangers until the very moment in which it affects them. this must've been the case with all the great wars that we've had. the water is rising but until I start to suffocate I don't agree to see it. i make up copes, or I think some are going to drown but I'm safe, or I distract myself.

what are all the software engineers here thinking? what's your cope for this? or are we all freezing in shock right now? this o1 is solving problems that i know many of my colleagues can never solve. what are we hoping for I think? I don't have a future because my future was the image that I had of it. and no image of the future that would be nice to keep around seems plausible at this point.

Re: Terence Tao on O1

#407

Post by someguy293 »

teaearlgraycold wrote: post #316
asdasjhG wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, almost everyone who gets funding for a business already belongs to the monied royalty and gets it either directly from his family, via friends of the family or laundered through a VC. There are exceptions of course, but that's how the bulk of businesses, especially those with stupid ideas are funded. In the latter category success does not even matter, the trust fund baby just has to have the appearance of a lead…

There is truth to this, but you’re overstating it. If AI is cheap and can replace grunt workers then we’ll have a massive wave of new businesses solving problems that previously required a massive capital investment.

not fully related to what the parent is saying, but I need to get this off my chest:

isn't this development obviously going to result in the deprecation of the value of the human intellect to near-zero? which is the thing that virtually all people on this platform base their livelihood on?

there's such a deafening silence around this topic on the internet where there should be - i don't know what but not this silence. we don't know what to do right? and we're avoiding this topic.

with this version they broke the assumed wall of llms's developed that was the last copium that we could believe in. the wall is broken and now it's just a matter of time until your capacity to think will be completely unneeded. the machine will do it more accurately and more quickly by orders of magnitude.

am I a doomer? I was in the home country of my parents recently, that is completely dysfunctional and war is on the verge of breaking out. what I learned there is that humans stay ignorant of great dangers until the very moment in which it affects them. this must've been the case with all the great wars that we've had. the water is rising but until I start to suffocate I don't agree to see it. i make up copes, or I think some are going to drown but I'm safe, or I distract myself.

what are all the software engineers here thinking? what's your cope for this? or are we all freezing in shock right now? this o1 is solving problems that i know many of my colleagues can never solve. what are we hoping for I think? I don't have a future because my future was the image that I had of it. and no image of the future that would be nice to keep around seems plausible at this point.

Re: Terence Tao on O1

#408

Post by jessekv »

9dev wrote: post #360
zeroonetwothree wrote: post #336

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This makes no sense, there are problems that 'brilliant' programmers can solve and no number of mediocre ones ones. Just like you can't substitute Mozart with 100 mediocre composers.

So, how many people listen to Mozart and how many to Taylor Swift?

Now, or in 300 years?

Re: Terence Tao on O1

#409

Post by dartos »

mewpmewp2 wrote: post #405
homebrewer wrote: post #381

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Same experience, but with TypeScript and Go. They gave me a 60-day trial (IIRC), I used it for two days, disabled it for the next 58 days, and after that removed it from the editor.

I get really good results with TypeScript and Python. Like it knows exactly what I want to do, I feel like I think exactly as Copilot does. Maybe I am the statistical average... Makes me wonder if people who don't like Copilot output will not like my natural output as well.

Feel free not to share, I don’t want you to get dogpiled, but if you would humor me,

Could you share any code on GitHub (or pastebin or whatever) that you wrote with the help of AI?

Or could you share what kind of experience you have with programming (how many years, what domain you work in, etc)

Re: Terence Tao on O1

#410

Post by objektif »

HarHarVeryFunny wrote: post #404
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #246

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The first profession AI seems on track to decimate is programming. In particular, the brilliant but remote and individual contributor. There is an obvious conflict of interest in this forum.

The programmers who will find LLMs most useful are going to be those who prior to LLMs were copying and pasting from Stack Overflow, and asking questions online about everything they were doing - tasks that LLMs have precisely replaced (it has now memorized all that boilerplate code, consensus answers, and API usage examples). The developers who will find LLMs the least useful are the "brilliant" ones who never found…

How many of them are there of the latter type? In my 15 yrs of experience I would say 95%+ of all developers belong to your first category.
Post reply on HN