Earlier quoted context omitted.
Obvious false analogy in your earlier argument.
No so obvious to this guy.
it is truly not obvious to you why keyboard isn’t a good analogy for LLM?
How An AI math breakthrough ignited a controversy
201–210 of 243 posts
Re: How An AI math breakthrough ignited a controversy
#202Question for the maths people please: Is this solution related to strange attractors? Looking at the visualization my mind can’t help but see a resemblance. I would really appreciate anyone’s 2-cents :)
Re: How An AI math breakthrough ignited a controversy
#203The whole thing reeks of the desperation of an unprofitable venture-backed startup looking for its next PR win to keep the wind in the sails. But I think what’s being overlooked in the race to claim absolute credit is that both sides ultimately relied on a LLM (and one of OpenAI’s at that). Either a human researcher made a breakthrough discovery with the help of Codex, or the latest GPT model made a breakthrough with…
[deleted]
Re: How An AI math breakthrough ignited a controversy
#204Earlier quoted context omitted.
In the same way you rely on a keyboard or touchscreen to type this comment. It doesn't mean the tool is the brain behind the work.
Keyboards don't suggest chains of reasoning or words to type. When I press the K key, I know exactly what will happen. It's just a translation layer that gives an output known ahead of time and thus does not impinge upon the creativity of putting words together. A better example would be playing chess against a player slightly stronger than me and using a chess computer to suggest some good moves. I could win, but it…
> Keyboards don't suggest chains of reasoning or words to type
My iPhone keyboard does
Re: How An AI math breakthrough ignited a controversy
#205Extensive discussion on OpenAI's blog post on Navier-Stokes: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49613262 . Quanta Magazine article that also discusses some of the controversy: https://www.quantamagazine.org/ai-has-solved-one-of-maths-1-...
And yet you still posted this dupe. That quanta piece more duplication. Everything already well discussed in the OpenAI and the Tristan Buckmaster threads! Do better.
I don't think you add value to this conversation, or any of the many conversations in which you do this, by simply pointing out duplicate threads. You'd probably be better off (and less annoying) by simply emailing the mods about the duplication.
Re: How An AI math breakthrough ignited a controversy
#206Earlier quoted context omitted.
For any practical application, numerical solvers for Navier-Stokes already exist and do a good job. This proof is just checking the boxes for mathematicians.
The efficacy of applied NS was never in doubt. "Checking the box" is downplaying the magnitude of the discovery quite a bit as it has been unsolved for almost 100 years. Yes, this particular problem with NS no real-world applications, but that's true for 99.9% of math research.
There is no NS proof here. Its just a counter example. There is another team working on a proof but they aren't associated with OpenAI.
Re: How An AI math breakthrough ignited a controversy
#207Earlier quoted context omitted.
you're as sure of what you say as wrong about it.
If that were true you could explain it. There are lots of solvers for navier stokes simulations and they do a good job.
True, this is just a much bigger one with a vastly larger amounts of hardware.
Re: How An AI math breakthrough ignited a controversy
#208Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you want to be pedantic it’s one of the 7 problems a specific institute considers to be the most important in mathematics: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millennium_Prize_Problems (Not that I think the comparison to pi digits make sense)
are we really moving the goalpost after solving Millenium Prize Problem? Six years ago that would be something, but today let's move the goalpost
Willing to bet if an AI next cures a cancer people here will go “that wasn’t the most dangerous type of cancer so it is meaningless”.
Re: How An AI math breakthrough ignited a controversy
#209Perhaps the question should not be "Is OpenAI trustworthy?" but instead "Is any company trustworthy? What does vast amounts of capital do to the trustworthiness of an entity?"
Re: How An AI math breakthrough ignited a controversy
#210Earlier quoted context omitted.
but the researchers were also largely relying on AI
“relying on” is misleading here relative to what the researchers have said. If I write a book and pass it through a spelling and polish checker, I still wrote the book and its core IP. I didn’t “rely on” the tool to create the IP.
If this were the case the problem would not have remained unsolved for this long. A new spell checker is not what cracked the problem.