The broader problem is that current AI and AI companies are not aligned with humans, human values, or human flourishing. AI is a powerful tool that can be aimed at quantified goals but we don't actually know how to quantify human values and flourishing (Goodhart's Law).
A misalignment of AI in mathematics
231–240 of 251 posts
Re: A misalignment of AI in mathematics
#232If the goal of math is to communicate results it has utterly failed long before AI and they are in a weak position to defend this view. Every researcher is only taught a handful of DSLs and their papers are written in PSL(problem specific language). That may be necessary for a human to actually make forward progress in math, but it's certainly not conducive to reading (and certainly not when symbols are favored over English)
I think the mathematics community should realign their goals with humanities, not just declare themselves a "mini humanity", this means expanding human taste, intuition and communicating systems and their associated structural truths in a human friendly way. Bye-bye standardized education you won't be missed.
Re: A misalignment of AI in mathematics
#233We need a new way to describe "alignment". The term "misalignment" assumes that there is some perfect set of beliefs or practices to be out of alignment with. Do Atheists, Christians, Jews and Muslims agree on what is perfect alignment? How about Europeans, Americans and Chinese? Humans, Dolphins, Rabbits and Fruit Flies?
Alignment alone is not enough. Aligned with _what_?
Re: A misalignment of AI in mathematics
#234I have been enjoying this show. Math Minds vs Ai it will be wonderful how this all plays out.
Re: A misalignment of AI in mathematics
#235Yeah, anyone who doesn't yet have a Fields Medal, step back. Reassess.
Re: A misalignment of AI in mathematics
#236how do we get this site a CDN, I haven't been able to access it in a few days
Re: A misalignment of AI in mathematics
#237I wish this were a document that clearly described how mathematicians expect AI to behave, rather than how it is misaligned. I can kind of decipher the expectation from the declaration, but it still sounds a bit like "it would be better if AI didn't meddle with mathematics", instead of "we want AI to approach problems like this and that way".
Re: A misalignment of AI in mathematics
#238Many comments seem to be misinterpreting this, but all this seems to be suggesting is that the AI companies should not be treating mathematical milestones as benchmark targets but need to release the cumulative findings in a human interpretable and digestible way that enriches and develops the field. See Thurston quote on Tao's banner:
> We are not trying to meet some abstract production quota of definitions, theorems and proofs. The measure of our success is whether what we do enables people to understand and think more clearly and effectively about mathematics.
Re: A misalignment of AI in mathematics
#239A lot of words used to say very little
Re: A misalignment of AI in mathematics
#240I don't feel nurtured and cared by mathematicians. I mean, it depends, it took me four years to find such professors. When I did, very recently, it felt like fresh air. A couple of good teachers among tenths of egotistical frustrated gatekeepers that humiliate students.
I do see a patient teacher on generative tools. What has keep me trying to learn math has not been mathematicians, but the support of people outside of the field.