Live data from Hacker News

GPT-5.6 used a prompt to close a 30-year gap in convex optimization

old.reddit.com

31–40 of 414 posts

Re: GPT-5.6 used a prompt to close a 30-year gap in convex optimization

#31
post #27
post #14

Crazy how intelligence is cheap, efficient and commonplace now. We humans better refocusing our energy on our core values/principles, given most of our skills are becoming irrelevant

Once we figure out the pesky problem of how we're going to pay for housing, food, and healthcare.

When machines are doing all the work - we no longer have to.

Re: GPT-5.6 used a prompt to close a 30-year gap in convex optimization

#32
post #14

Crazy how intelligence is cheap, efficient and commonplace now. We humans better refocusing our energy on our core values/principles, given most of our skills are becoming irrelevant

It's still clear that LLMs lack spatial reasoning, either in the concrete or abstract, and while that sort of reasoning has been downplayed by academia for at least a century it is fundamental to technology and industry. (And many would say for science and mathematics too).

They will, however, get there as well either directly or as interfaces to models that do, and your core point stands.

Re: GPT-5.6 used a prompt to close a 30-year gap in convex optimization

#34
post #14

Crazy how intelligence is cheap, efficient and commonplace now. We humans better refocusing our energy on our core values/principles, given most of our skills are becoming irrelevant

Oh brother

AI hasn’t even taken the class of jobs associated with customer service lmao

Re: GPT-5.6 used a prompt to close a 30-year gap in convex optimization

#35
post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You’re at least 18 months out of date claiming that prompting will be the new hot skill. Turns out LLMs are also good at prompting other LLMs.

That doesn't make any sense; you can't have one LLM to read your mind to prompt another LLM.

I'm going to keep on repeating this on HN threads until I'm blue in the face, but:

There are two ways to solve a problem. Either solve the problem, or deem it irrelevant.

The implication here is that, you, the human operator, clearly are just confused. The LLM knows best. You're just a stupid human. The LLM knows objective truth, you do not. You have concerns, questions, the LLM didn't understand your question "properly"? Do not worry, the LLM objectively knows the optimal course of action. It thought through the implications of what you said, took into account all possible data, and came to the objectively correct design for your software, your society, your life.

In some sense, this problem would have been a societal problem within the next several decades anyways, but it's been hyper-accelerated by AI.

Re: GPT-5.6 used a prompt to close a 30-year gap in convex optimization

#36
post #34
post #14

Crazy how intelligence is cheap, efficient and commonplace now. We humans better refocusing our energy on our core values/principles, given most of our skills are becoming irrelevant

Oh brother AI hasn’t even taken the class of jobs associated with customer service lmao

Do we employ mathematicians in customer service roles?

Re: GPT-5.6 used a prompt to close a 30-year gap in convex optimization

#37
post #30
post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Once we figure out the pesky problem of how we're going to pay for housing, food, and healthcare.

I can't stop wondering myself.... I'm writing some software with AI and wondering, why am I doing this? Will anyone need this? Will anyone have money to buy this? Best I've come up with is we'll need to be adopted by technofeudlaist overlords to be our patrons like in the roman days

[flagged]

Re: GPT-5.6 used a prompt to close a 30-year gap in convex optimization

#38
post #14

Crazy how intelligence is cheap, efficient and commonplace now. We humans better refocusing our energy on our core values/principles, given most of our skills are becoming irrelevant

If it were commonplace, there wouldn't be a post and discussion about it. Cheap? Arguable - while it didn't cost thousands, it wasn't free. Cheap is in the eye of the beholder. Efficient...How do we even measure that? The massive infrastructure and training to take a product to the point where someone could do this is massive. Ignoring everything behind the scenes and acting like one session and result is the whole picture of efficiency doesn't seem right. And no, nothing produced by AI makes skills irrelevant. That is the whole ongoing argument of whether people are losing cognitive ability by moving their thinking to AI.

Overall, this is an impressive proof of capability. But I wouldn't take that proof as anything more than what it is.

Re: GPT-5.6 used a prompt to close a 30-year gap in convex optimization

#39

Waiting for comments saying that LLMs can't produce anything new and general goalpost moving.

HEH. Don't know why you're getting downvoted. It's painfully obvious that there is a vicious AI backlash now, where every amazing advancement is met with denial and loathing.

Oh wait, sorry, I do know why you're getting downvoted. Fear.

Re: GPT-5.6 used a prompt to close a 30-year gap in convex optimization

#40
post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm starting to feel like there's no place left for programmers like me who focus on quickly churning out MVPs. Of course there is. The same way this was only possible as a result from the professor who prompted it with his specialized 10 page prompt and most importantly his deep knowledge of the problem space, the muscle memory and intuition you've built over the years is what will allow you to get more out of any…

So these days I've been writing down my thoughts on my personal homepage. Things I've learned, my background knowledge, and so on. I've been realizing that there are more books tied to my background knowledge than I expected, but I'm not sure what will happen as AI advances further. These days, I'm living for the fun of building my own personal wiki on my homepage

Why write it down? LLM crawlers will ingest it in a second.
Post reply on HN