191–200 of 737 posts
Its a level playing field IMO. But theres another thread which claims not even bronze and I really don't want to go to X for anything.
The cynicism/denial on HN about AI is exhausting. Half the comments are some weird form of explaining away the ever increasing performance of these models I've been reading this website for probably 15 years, its never been this bad. many threads are completely unreadable, all the actual educated takes are on X, its almost like there was a talent drain
So, as much I get the frustration comments like these don't really add much. Its complaining about others complaining. Instead this should be taken as a signal that maybe HN is not the right forum to read about these topics.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Half the comments are some weird form of explaining how developers will be obsolete in five years and how close we are to AGI. I do not see that at all in this comment section. There is a lot of denial and cynicism like the parent comment suggested. The comments trying to dismiss this as just “some high school math problem” are the funniest example.
[flagged]
Definitely interesting. Two thoughts. First, are the IMO questions somewhat related to other openly available questions online, making it easier for LLMs that are more efficient and better at reasoning to deduce the results from the available content? Second, happy to test it on open math conjectures or by attempting to reprove recent math results.
You mean as in the previous years questions will have been used to train it? Yes, they are the same questions and due to them limited format on math questions, there are repeats so LLMs should fundamentally be able to recognise a structure and similarities and use that.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Most evidence you have about the world is claims from other people, not direct experiment. There seems to be a thought-terminating cliche here on HN, dismissing any claim from employees of large tech companies. Unlike seemingly most here on HN, I judge people's trustworthiness individually and not solely by the organization they belong to. Noam Brown is a well known researcher in the field and I see no reason to doub…
OpenAI have already shown us they aren’t trustworthy. Remember the FrontierMath debacle?
The one OpenAI "scandal" that I did agree with was the thing where they threatened to cancel people's vested equity if they didn't sign a non-disparagement agreement. They did apologize for that one and make changes. But it doesn't have a lot to do with their research claims.
I'm open to actual evidence that OpenAI's research claims are untrustworthy, but again, I also judge people individually, not just by the organization they belong to.
The cynicism/denial on HN about AI is exhausting. Half the comments are some weird form of explaining away the ever increasing performance of these models I've been reading this website for probably 15 years, its never been this bad. many threads are completely unreadable, all the actual educated takes are on X, its almost like there was a talent drain
This sounds like a version of "HN hates X and I am tired of it". In last 10 years or so I have been reading HN, X has been crypto, Musk/Tesla and many more. So, as much I get the frustration comments like these don't really add much. Its complaining about others complaining. Instead this should be taken as a signal that maybe HN is not the right forum to read about these topics.
It's healthy to be skeptical, and it's even healthier to be skeptical of openai, but there are commenters who clearly have no idea of what IMO problems are saying that this means nothing somehow?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I went through the thread and saw nothing that looked like this. I don’t think developers will be obsolete in five years. I don’t think AGI is around the corner. But I do think this is the biggest breakthrough in computer science history. I worked on accelerating DNNs a little less than a decade ago and had you shown me what we’re seeing now with LLMs I’d say it was closer to 50 years out than 20 years out.
[flagged]
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Half the comments are some weird form of explaining how developers will be obsolete in five years and how close we are to AGI. I do not see that at all in this comment section. There is a lot of denial and cynicism like the parent comment suggested. The comments trying to dismiss this as just “some high school math problem” are the funniest example.
[flagged]
The cynicism/denial on HN about AI is exhausting. Half the comments are some weird form of explaining away the ever increasing performance of these models I've been reading this website for probably 15 years, its never been this bad. many threads are completely unreadable, all the actual educated takes are on X, its almost like there was a talent drain
Almost every technical comment on HN is wrong (see for example essentially all the discussion of Rust async, in which people keep making up silly claims that Rust maintainers then attempt to patiently explain are wrong).
The idea that the "educated" takes are on X though... that's crazy talk.
My view is that it's less impressive than previous go and chess results. Humans are worse at competitive math than at those games, it's still very limited space and well defined problems. They may hype "general purpose" as much as they want but for now it's still the case that AI is super human at well defined limited space tasks and can't achieve performance of a mediocre below average human at simple tasks without…