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

GPT-5.6 Sol Ultra produces proof of the Cycle Double Cover Conjecture [pdf]

cdn.openai.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 467 posts

Re: GPT-5.6 Sol Ultra produces proof of the Cycle Double Cover Conjecture [pdf]

#241

Post by adamtaylor_13 »

munksbeer wrote: post #216
StefanBatory wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's hard for me not to think what's the point. I am a very average, even below average person in times of intelligence. What is even my value or reason to be if I know anything I can do, LLMs can do better? What is even my value both on job market and as a human?

Sorry to be nihilist, but you never had any objective value if you're thinking in these terms. As far as we know, the universe "just is". There is no universal objective value of human beings, at all, any one of us. You have to make or find your own value in the universe. I try not to think too hard about the nihilist side and try to appreciate that for some unfathomable reason, I seem to have what I call consciousne…

> As far as we know, the universe "just is".

I don't know this. In fact, billions of people around the world don't know this. In fact, all evidence points to the contrary.

You have objective value being made in the image of a personal God. Denying that leads to a lot of pain, namely nihilistic suffering because it's on you to "pull yourself up by the bootstraps" in any endeavor involving your own self-worth.

Re: GPT-5.6 Sol Ultra produces proof of the Cycle Double Cover Conjecture [pdf]

#242

Post by breezybottom »

StefanBatory wrote: post #147
WhitneyLand wrote: post #75

If all checks out this is a huge milestone. AI has now solved one of the most famous open problems in graph theory, using an off the shelf model, in one hour. It might be a better mathematician than most humans at this point. Kind of like when chess software started beating everyone except grandmasters. What’s left? Proposing and building out entirely new theories and frameworks? Then better than any human? Then alie…

It's hard for me not to think what's the point. I am a very average, even below average person in times of intelligence. What is even my value or reason to be if I know anything I can do, LLMs can do better? What is even my value both on job market and as a human?

Manual labor

Re: GPT-5.6 Sol Ultra produces proof of the Cycle Double Cover Conjecture [pdf]

#243

Post by SubiculumCode »

plaidfuji wrote: post #230

It seems like a solid set of criteria for how easily a task can be automated by AI agents is: - extent to which correctness of solution be easily specified and checked - extent to which new potential solutions can be implemented as text - extent to which prior art exists online This basically maps to software engineering and math. I think a fair bit of AI hype comes from the fact that the very architects of AI are th…

Human: I specialize in tasks in which the correctness of my solution cannot be easily specified or checked. Truuuuussssttttt meeeeee.

I'm just saying, let's not get painted into that corner completely as a species :)

Re: GPT-5.6 Sol Ultra produces proof of the Cycle Double Cover Conjecture [pdf]

#244

Post by romaniv »

No one here actually cares about Cycle Double Cover Conjecture. I can demonstrate this by pointing out that the only time this conjecture was ever mentioned on the website was 14 years ago in a submission[1] that linked to a (now retracted) proof paper. That story received exactly zero upvotes. No one cared enough to upvote it and no one cared enough to ever mention this conjecture again.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3556175

Re: GPT-5.6 Sol Ultra produces proof of the Cycle Double Cover Conjecture [pdf]

#245

Post by swat535 »

breezybottom wrote: post #242
StefanBatory wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's hard for me not to think what's the point. I am a very average, even below average person in times of intelligence. What is even my value or reason to be if I know anything I can do, LLMs can do better? What is even my value both on job market and as a human?

Manual labor

Even that is being automated now, it was one of the thing being automated very early on in factories..

Re: GPT-5.6 Sol Ultra produces proof of the Cycle Double Cover Conjecture [pdf]

#246

Post by itsthecourier »

romaniv wrote: post #244

No one here actually cares about Cycle Double Cover Conjecture. I can demonstrate this by pointing out that the only time this conjecture was ever mentioned on the website was 14 years ago in a submission[1] that linked to a (now retracted) proof paper. That story received exactly zero upvotes. No one cared enough to upvote it and no one cared enough to ever mention this conjecture again. [1] https://news.ycombinator…

yeah, I think what makes this post different was that AI did it. hopefully science will advance faster in the next decades with AI researchers helping

Re: GPT-5.6 Sol Ultra produces proof of the Cycle Double Cover Conjecture [pdf]

#247

Post by coderenegade »

0x457 wrote: post #171
a_e_k wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Once on a late-night session, I had Cline!Claude spontaneously point out the time to me and suggest that I get to bed and come back fresh the next day. I don't think it's in the system prompt, but that the harnesses time-stamp each turn in the context. And from what I've seen, they also include the current and max context, so that the model can decide whether to continue work, suggest compaction, or prefer actions th…

> Once on a late-night session, I had Cline!Claude spontaneously point out the time to me and suggest that I get to bed and come back fresh the next day. I had Claude say something "It's getting late, let's pick this up tomorrow" at like 11am. As for context, in my experience Claude starts trying either to do maximum work with minimum tokens when it's approaching limit, or it starts deferring useful work while doing…

This is my experience with Claude as well, and the reason I switched to codex. Codex just seems far more efficient, despite the smaller context window, and it actually follows instructions.

Re: GPT-5.6 Sol Ultra produces proof of the Cycle Double Cover Conjecture [pdf]

#248

Post by Sabinus »

IsTom wrote: post #217
esafak wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What's left? I think humans will be left to propose new conjectures while machines fill out the proofs. I don't know if there are enough interesting conjectures to go round to build new careers, though.

To be able to propose interesting conjectures you need to walk the walk of trying to prove things yourself. That's not great for future generations.

Isn't it same argument for every tool we've created?

Re: GPT-5.6 Sol Ultra produces proof of the Cycle Double Cover Conjecture [pdf]

#249

Post by pianopatrick »

plaidfuji wrote: post #230

It seems like a solid set of criteria for how easily a task can be automated by AI agents is: - extent to which correctness of solution be easily specified and checked - extent to which new potential solutions can be implemented as text - extent to which prior art exists online This basically maps to software engineering and math. I think a fair bit of AI hype comes from the fact that the very architects of AI are th…

Let's assume AI is only good at software and math.

If we can use AI to write lots of good software for cheap, that software can automate away a lot of jobs.

So AI does not have to take the jobs directly, software written by AI can.

Especially if that works for software for robots.

Re: GPT-5.6 Sol Ultra produces proof of the Cycle Double Cover Conjecture [pdf]

#250

Post by honeycrispy »

itsthecourier wrote: post #246
romaniv wrote: post #244

No one here actually cares about Cycle Double Cover Conjecture. I can demonstrate this by pointing out that the only time this conjecture was ever mentioned on the website was 14 years ago in a submission[1] that linked to a (now retracted) proof paper. That story received exactly zero upvotes. No one cared enough to upvote it and no one cared enough to ever mention this conjecture again. [1] https://news.ycombinator…

yeah, I think what makes this post different was that AI did it. hopefully science will advance faster in the next decades with AI researchers helping

Hopefully. So far it seems to be doing more harm than good.
Post reply on HN