Live data from Hacker News

Erdos 281 solved with ChatGPT 5.2 Pro

twitter.com

51–60 of 310 posts

Re: Erdos 281 solved with ChatGPT 5.2 Pro

#51
post #9

This is crazy. It's clear that these models don't have human intelligence, but it's undeniable at this point that they have _some_ form of intelligence.

As someone who doesn't understand this shit, and how it's always the experts who fiddle the LLMs to get good outputs, it feels natural to attribute the intelligence to the operator (or the training set), rather than the LLM itself.

Re: Erdos 281 solved with ChatGPT 5.2 Pro

#52
post #45
post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interesting that in Terrance Tao's words: "though the new proof is still rather different from the literature proof)" And even odder that the proof was by Erdos himself and yet he listed it as an open problem!

Maybe it was in the training set.

I think that was Tao's point, that the new proof was not just read out of the training set.

Re: Erdos 281 solved with ChatGPT 5.2 Pro

#53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why not plan for a future where a lot of non-trivial tasks are automated instead of living on the edge with all this anxiety?

[flagged]

If all of it is going away and you should deny reality, what does everything else you wrote even mean?

Re: Erdos 281 solved with ChatGPT 5.2 Pro

#54
post #47

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.

It's bizarre. The same account was previously arguing in favor of emergent reasoning abilities in another thread ( https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46453084 ) -- I voted it up, in fact! Turing test failed, I guess.

(edit: fixed link)

Re: Erdos 281 solved with ChatGPT 5.2 Pro

#55
post #47

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.

(edit: removed duplicate comment from above, not sure how that happened)

Re: Erdos 281 solved with ChatGPT 5.2 Pro

#56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why not plan for a future where a lot of non-trivial tasks are automated instead of living on the edge with all this anxiety?

[flagged]

Yes, it is simply impossible that anyone could look at things and do your own evaluations and come to a different, much more skeptical conclusion.

The only possible explanation is people say things they don't believe out of FUD. Literally the only one.

Re: Erdos 281 solved with ChatGPT 5.2 Pro

#57
post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

It's bizarre. The same account was previously arguing in favor of emergent reasoning abilities in another thread ( https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46453084 ) -- I voted it up, in fact! Turing test failed, I guess. (edit: fixed link)

We need a name for the much more trivial version of the Turing test that replaces "human" with "weird dude with rambling ideas he clearly thinks are very deep"

I'm pretty sure it's like "can it run DOOM" and someone could make an LLM that passes this that runs on an pregnancy test

Re: Erdos 281 solved with ChatGPT 5.2 Pro

#58
post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

(edit: removed duplicate comment from above, not sure how that happened)

It's a formal sarcasm piece.

Re: Erdos 281 solved with ChatGPT 5.2 Pro

#59
post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

It's bizarre. The same account was previously arguing in favor of emergent reasoning abilities in another thread ( https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46453084 ) -- I voted it up, in fact! Turing test failed, I guess. (edit: fixed link)

I thought the mockery and sarcasm in my piece was rather obvious.

Re: Erdos 281 solved with ChatGPT 5.2 Pro

#60
post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

(edit: removed duplicate comment from above, not sure how that happened)

the poster is in fact being very sarcastic. arguing in favor of emergent reasoning does in fact make sense
Post reply on HN