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

Erdos 281 solved with ChatGPT 5.2 Pro

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 310 posts

Re: Erdos 281 solved with ChatGPT 5.2 Pro

#291

Post by mmooss »

glemion43 wrote: post #279
mmooss wrote: post #270

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It doesn't matter if ai is in a hype cycle or not it doesn't change how a technology works. It does change what people say about it. Our words are not reality itself; the map is not the territory. Are you saying people should take everything said about LLMs at face value?

Being dismissive of technical terms on hn because something seems to be a hype is really weird. It's the reason why I'm here because we discuss more technically about technology

I wasn't dismissive, just wary. As a new account, it's odd to be lecturing people on behavior. You're the one diverting the conversation.

Re: Erdos 281 solved with ChatGPT 5.2 Pro

#292

Post by dang »

Der_Einzige wrote: post #226
glemion43 wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you have a source for this? Carbon copy would mean over fitting

Source is just read the definition of what "temperature" is. But honestly source = "a knuckle sandwich" would be appropriate here.

Threatening violence*, even in this virtual way and encased in quotation marks, is not allowed here.

Edit: you've been breaking the site guidelines badly in other threads as well. (To pick one example of many: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46601932.) We've asked you many times not to.

I don't want to ban your account because your good contributions are good and I do believe you're well-intentioned. But really, can you please take the intended spirit of this site more to heart and fix this? Because at some point the damage caused by poisonous comments is worse.

https://news.ycombinator.com/showhn.html

* it would be more accurate to say "using violent language as a trope in an argument" - I don't believe in taking comments like this literally, as if they're really threatening violence. Nonetheless you can't post this way to HN.

Re: Erdos 281 solved with ChatGPT 5.2 Pro

#293

Post by dang »

magnio wrote: post #50
threethirtytwo wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Pity that HN's ability to detect sarcasm is as robust as that of a sentiment analysis model using keyword-matching.

I'm more worried that the best LLMs aren't yet good enough to classify satire reliably.

Re: Erdos 281 solved with ChatGPT 5.2 Pro

#294

Post by glemion43 »

mmooss wrote: post #291
glemion43 wrote: post #279

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Being dismissive of technical terms on hn because something seems to be a hype is really weird. It's the reason why I'm here because we discuss more technically about technology

I wasn't dismissive, just wary. As a new account, it's odd to be lecturing people on behavior. You're the one diverting the conversation.

I'm in hn for 10 years.

I spend too much time here and decided to delete my account to interact less.

It's partially working though

Re: Erdos 281 solved with ChatGPT 5.2 Pro

#296

Post by int_19h »

Workaccount2 wrote: post #251
fweimer wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I saw weird results with Gemini 2.5 Pro when I asked it to provide concrete source code examples matching certain criteria, and to quote the source code it found verbatim. It said it in its response quoted the sources verbatim, but that wasn't true at all—they had been rewritten, still in the style of the project it was quoting from, but otherwise quite different, and without a match in the Git history. It looked a b…

LLM's are not archives of information. People seem to have this belief, or perhaps just general intuition, that LLMs are a google search on a training set with a fancy language engine on the front end. That's not what they are. The models (almost) self avoid copyright, because they never copy anything in the first place, hence why the model is a dense web of weight connections rather than an orderly bookshelf of copi…

While true in general, they do know many things verbatim. For instance, GPT-4 can reproduce the Navy SEAL copypasta word for word with all the misspellings.

Re: Erdos 281 solved with ChatGPT 5.2 Pro

#297

Post by cubefox »

antonvs wrote: post #249
cubefox wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This illustrates how unimportant this problem is. A prior solution did exist, but apparently nobody knew because people didn't really care about it. If progress can be had by simply searching for old solutions in the literature, then that's good evidence the supposed progress is imaginary. And this is not the first time this has happened with an Erdős problem. A lot of pure mathematics seems to consist in solving nea…

> "intrinsic importance" "Intrinsic" in contexts like this is a word for people who are projecting what they consider important onto the world. You can't define it in any meaningful way that's not entirely subjective.

Mathematical theorems at least have objectively lower information content, because they merely rule out the impossible, while scientific knowledge also rules out the possible but non-actual.

Re: Erdos 281 solved with ChatGPT 5.2 Pro

#298

Post by Workaccount2 »

int_19h wrote: post #296
Workaccount2 wrote: post #251

Earlier quoted context omitted.

LLM's are not archives of information. People seem to have this belief, or perhaps just general intuition, that LLMs are a google search on a training set with a fancy language engine on the front end. That's not what they are. The models (almost) self avoid copyright, because they never copy anything in the first place, hence why the model is a dense web of weight connections rather than an orderly bookshelf of copi…

While true in general, they do know many things verbatim. For instance, GPT-4 can reproduce the Navy SEAL copypasta word for word with all the misspellings.

I'd imagine more than a few basement dwellers could as well.

Re: Erdos 281 solved with ChatGPT 5.2 Pro

#299

Post by CamperBob2 »

casey2 wrote: post #290
nl wrote: post #281

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's an update from Tao after emailing Tenenbaum (the paper author) about this: > He speculated that "the formulation [of the problem] has been altered in some way".... [snip] > More broadly, I think what has happened is that Rogers' nice result (which, incidentally, can also be proven using the method of compressions) simply has not had the dissemination it deserves. (I for one was unaware of it until KoishiChan…

This whole thread is pretty funny. Either it can demo some pretty clever, but still limited, features resulting in math skills OR it's literally the best search engine ever invented. My guess is the former, it's pretty whatever at web search and I'd expect to see something similar to the easily retrievable, more visible proof method from Rogers' (as opposed to some alleged proof hidden in some dataset).

Either it can demo some pretty clever, but still limited, features resulting in math skills OR it's literally the best search engine ever invented.

Both are precisely true. It is a better search engine than anything else -- which, while true, is something you won't realize unless you've used the non-free 'pro research' features from Google and/or OpenAI. And it can perform limited but increasingly-capable reasoning about what it finds before presenting the results to the user.

Note that no online Web search or tool usage at all was involved in the recent IMO results. I think a lot of people missed that little detail.

Re: Erdos 281 solved with ChatGPT 5.2 Pro

#300

Post by georgeven »

johnfn wrote: post #47
threethirtytwo wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

I suspect this is AI generated, but it’s quite high quality, and doesn’t have any of the telltale signs that most AI generated content does. How did you generate this? It’s great.

[dead]
Post reply on HN