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

My Mental Model of AI Broke on September 8

rough-ideas.bearblog.dev

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 70 posts

Re: My Mental Model of AI Broke on September 8

#11

Post by imjonse »

matteoraso wrote: post #6
znnajdla wrote: post #3

I think the author is not aware of how much the Millennium Prize proof was actually driven by a human working for years towards that problem. The AI did not solve this on its own. A world class mathematician prompted it towards the proof. In my view, this is still a human achievement, not an AI achievement. If I design a bulldozer to push a five ton rock, did I push the rock or the bulldozer? If the AI really did get…

This is copium. Humans worked on it, but they didn't come close to actually solving it. Even if you do the whole "the AI looked at material in its training data" thing, modern AI can make their own math data to train on with RLVF. This new model is legitimately on a different plane of existence from modern mathematicians.

it should be able to solve some of the five left Millenium Prize problems then in a few weeks.

Re: My Mental Model of AI Broke on September 8

#12

Post by mikeyouse »

pingou wrote: post #7

It took the author until Sept. 8, 2026, to realize LLMs are not just stochastic parrots? I'm glad they did, but I'm not sure that is worthy of the front page. "I remember early systems struggling with something as simple as 2+2. Then, within just a few years, we went from that to systems achieving IMO gold-medal-level performance and now, assuming this proof is correct, to a Millennium Prize problem. That completely…

It isn't hard to conceive of things that plateau so perhaps OP thought that the 'intelligence' underlying these models would reach some mark and then level off. If instead they just keep getting smarter/better, that can really impact the highest potential use that people can imagine for them.

Re: My Mental Model of AI Broke on September 8

#13

Post by butlike »

znnajdla wrote: post #3

I think the author is not aware of how much the Millennium Prize proof was actually driven by a human working for years towards that problem. The AI did not solve this on its own. A world class mathematician prompted it towards the proof. In my view, this is still a human achievement, not an AI achievement. If I design a bulldozer to push a five ton rock, did I push the rock or the bulldozer? If the AI really did get…

> If I design a bulldozer to push a five ton rock, did I push the rock or the bulldozer?

Unequivocally the bulldozer. You get to take the blame in design of the bulldozer, though.

Re: My Mental Model of AI Broke on September 8

#14

Post by frizlab »

pingou wrote: post #7

It took the author until Sept. 8, 2026, to realize LLMs are not just stochastic parrots? I'm glad they did, but I'm not sure that is worthy of the front page. "I remember early systems struggling with something as simple as 2+2. Then, within just a few years, we went from that to systems achieving IMO gold-medal-level performance and now, assuming this proof is correct, to a Millennium Prize problem. That completely…

They still are parrots. Just properly trained with a lot of data. Doesn’t make them not useful. But that’s what they are though.

Re: My Mental Model of AI Broke on September 8

#15

Post by EastLondonCoder »

For me it was a few years ago. I had seen a twitter comment referencing astrology in a spat with two black female musicians in the US. My preconception was to look up why that kind of superstition was prevalent in those circles.

The answer I got from chapgpt was essentially that it has very little to do with superstition and all to do with being able to use a language to talk about stuff while still not move outside cultural norms. More sort of a secret language where you can probe questions like if your boyfriend is violent, or if your friend is having an affair.

I think last year I saw some research on how the reading of tea leaves originated in the ottoman empire, it was remarkably similar. The point is that I learned something new that would have been extraordinarily hard to google, or even understand without putting some serious study into the subject.

Re: My Mental Model of AI Broke on September 8

#16

Post by scotty79 »

> My belief system was shattered the day the proof was announced.

I can't imagine having eyes and being able to hold the wrong belief regarding AI for so long. The fact that AI can surpass humans and make novel contributions to our civilization was obvious for me at least about a year earlier.

You need to have pretty messianic view of humans to believe otherwise.

Re: My Mental Model of AI Broke on September 8

#17

Post by [deleted] »

atleastoptimal wrote: post #8
znnajdla wrote: post #3

I think the author is not aware of how much the Millennium Prize proof was actually driven by a human working for years towards that problem. The AI did not solve this on its own. A world class mathematician prompted it towards the proof. In my view, this is still a human achievement, not an AI achievement. If I design a bulldozer to push a five ton rock, did I push the rock or the bulldozer? If the AI really did get…

You could say that about every scientific/mathematical breakthrough. Einstein's Special relativity depended heavily on Lorentz's work, the Michelson-Morley experiments, Maxwell's equations. Grigori Perelman, the only person to have solved a Millenium Prize problem, noted how his work was only possible due to Richard S. Hamilton's work on Ricci flow. Most scientific breakthroughs are just the completing the last 5% of…

[deleted]

Re: My Mental Model of AI Broke on September 8

#18

Post by hopelessluca »

I guess this post is not worthy of the front page. It is poorly written, repetitive, and feels like it was written by a LLM. It seems more like a reactionary post about events that have already happened. There is no insightful signal whatsoever just a remix of existing rhetoric. Ironically, the blog is also called "Rough Ideas" and the homepage says that the blog may contain rough ideas. I guess Hacker News has declined in quality these days. I might get flagged for saying this.

Re: My Mental Model of AI Broke on September 8

#19

Post by pingou »

frizlab wrote: post #14
pingou wrote: post #7

It took the author until Sept. 8, 2026, to realize LLMs are not just stochastic parrots? I'm glad they did, but I'm not sure that is worthy of the front page. "I remember early systems struggling with something as simple as 2+2. Then, within just a few years, we went from that to systems achieving IMO gold-medal-level performance and now, assuming this proof is correct, to a Millennium Prize problem. That completely…

They still are parrots. Just properly trained with a lot of data. Doesn’t make them not useful. But that’s what they are though.

I interpret the word 'parrot' to mean incapable of creative or original thought. Solving a major maths problem that has resisted the best mathematicians for so long seems to prove otherwise (even if it were just a matter of remixing old ideas, which is not the case here).

What do they need to do for you to consider them non parrots, and do you consider a lot of humans as parrots?

Post reply on HN