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

Ten advances in mathematics and theoretical computer science

openai.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

581–590 of 1001 posts

Re: Ten advances in mathematics and theoretical computer science

#581

Post by cwiz »

jstummbillig wrote: post #537
cwiz wrote: post #529

I feel increasingly anxious reading this. Machine research shouldn’t be merged into mainline of human knowledge.

Why?

Because science is a branch of philosophy and machine existence brings plethora of unanswered questions.

Imagine humankind meets another race, another race shares it's scientific knowledge and humans accept it without experiencing process of discovery. In that case do we really got this knowledge? If we follow machine discoveries like we follow problems in textbook then we acquire knowledge but we don't discover anything. We follow.

There whole lot of philosophical questions that aren't attacked now. Are complex systems sentient because consciousness is emerging behavior? Then should they have rights? Philosophy is part of humanities and science (is/used to be) part of philosophy. Should we accept non-human knowledge in science? Maybe it's altogether different thing from science, yet very similar.

Re: Ten advances in mathematics and theoretical computer science

#582

Post by WarmWash »

mofeien wrote: post #545
WarmWash wrote: post #428

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The human zoo where the top ~250,000k humans live in a "human utopia" and the AI provides while mostly focusing on whatever it decides it's own goals are. Humanity survives (but we reading this probably don't), the AI treats the living humans like the Emperor's favorite pets (probably a pretty good life), and then the AI does whatever else it deems important.

To what kind of goal that an ASI might decide to pursue would "a quarter billion happy, healthy, free people" be the most efficient solution to?

My mistake, I meant 250k*

Re: Ten advances in mathematics and theoretical computer science

#583

Post by MinimalAction »

dash2 wrote: post #348
MinimalAction wrote: post #311

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Absolutely not the same! People need jobs to bring in income. I don't believe those who profit off of this will share it with the world. The power is all concentrated in the few hands that decide whether or not the rest get any semblance of income in the long run. I don't believe UBS until it happens.

It sounds like you think no technological advances will make the world richer in the long run. I politely suggest that the past century of economic growth shows problems with this argument. I also think that, while jobs are important for prosperity, the jobs of mathematicians are a minuscule fraction of a percent of the total.

So, you're arguing that just because mathematicians are a minuscule, it doesn't matter for prosperity? Because, if so, that is an insane take honestly.

Re: Ten advances in mathematics and theoretical computer science

#584

Post by doctorwho42 »

gpm wrote: post #476
an0malous wrote: post #437

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It sounds like he hasn't verified the results of a problem that he has personally worked on, so how many of these problems have actually been verified?

I mean, they're verified in the sense that the lean proof checks out... and presumably OpenAI read them.

Or they made another LLM 'read' them?

> You are an expert in the field of mathematics, with decades of experience. You are a reviewer of proofs, etc etc.etc.

Re: Ten advances in mathematics and theoretical computer science

#585

Post by zahlman »

HarHarVeryFunny wrote: post #408
Chance-Device wrote: post #105

Pretty cool. The impact of AI is getting undeniable, there aren’t many positions left to move the goalposts to at this stage, next they’ll have to be outside the stadium entirely. The sooner people can be broken out of their denial about all this the better, and we can start actually taking it seriously.

Sorry to hear you've been impacted by this AI math. I heard that Gary Kasparov was impacted by AI chess, but at least he still seems to have a job, so don't give up.

Making insulting assumptions about the hidden motivations of others is not the level of discourse I come to HN for.

Re: Ten advances in mathematics and theoretical computer science

#586

Post by AngryData »

simianwords wrote: post #234
lifeisstillgood wrote: post #228

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry I thought that a bubble was widely accepted. Are you arguing there is not an AI bubble, and that all the DC buildout is fine, going to be profitable etc? I am not looking for a online slanging match - just looking for a different point of view

It’s not obvious at all. If it were obvious to you, it would’ve been to OpenAI. It’s in their interest to accurately predict demand. The assumption that OpenAI/Sam is both really powerful but simultaneously ignorant to know what others know as obvious is well.. just strange. Especially strange when OpenAI has more information on models, breakthrough and usage patterns and we don’t. I’m not participating in the slingi…

You say that like the tech world isn't littered in a field of dead and failed companies and billions of dollars burned on failed ventures and ideas. Sure LLMs have proven they have value, but where is the trillion dollars of current investment going to be paid back from? So far it is still entirely speculation that they have such a high value, and they can't just play the long game of "well after a few decades of production and iteration it will add up" because half the hardware cost is going to be obsolete energy burning trash for them in 5 years.

Re: Ten advances in mathematics and theoretical computer science

#587

Post by buddhistdude »

tuatoru wrote: post #547
sdenton4 wrote: post #495

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some of them... The two places were seeing lots of movement are: * Updates to lower/upper bounds. In many cases, these kinds of problems are the deep-math equivalent of calculating more digits of pi. Yes, if you throw time at it you'll break the record, but it may not be terribly worthwhile. * Finding counter examples which disprove conjectures. This is really useful, and helps offset some positivity bias on the huma…

"It's just brute-forcing the search space."

It can move to any place within the search space but it can't move outside of it and it can't move in between the 'pixels'. Human thought can, as human thought has created the search space.

Re: Ten advances in mathematics and theoretical computer science

#588

Post by lostmsu »

sweezyjeezy wrote: post #461
energy123 wrote: post #452

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No they were not. These were his 5 predictions in 2022: """ 1. By 2029, AI will still be unable to watch a movie and accurately explain the characters, events, conflicts, and motivations. 2. By 2029, AI will still be unable to read a novel and reliably answer questions about its plot, characters, conflicts, and motivations beyond what is stated literally. 3. By 2029, AI will still be unable to work as a competent coo…

Well I don't typically side with GM, but playing devil's advocate: 1. still not wrong? Unless it's just feeding the audio or screenplay I don't think you can feed AI a full movie in a single context window yet? 2. Not sure, but can you prove this wrong? Can you feed a full, unseen new book and get that kind of answer? 3. Not wrong. 4. I think he'd probably pull you up on 'bug free' - I don't think that frontier model…

1 is wrong. If I tell Codex + GPT-5.6 to do it now, it will figure out how to do it. If it would need to extract audio and run a speech model on it, it will find one, set it up, and run without my help.

Re: Ten advances in mathematics and theoretical computer science

#589

Post by righthand »

uh_uh wrote: post #119
dist-epoch wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think you want to bring cost into this argument. Even if the cost was $1 mil for these 10 problems, that's maybe 10-20 math researchers for a year. Do you really think that if you paid that to humans, they will deliver the same results?

It is comical at this point. Some people just can not stand the thought of AI actually delivering and are trying to find whatever ways to discredit it.

Entirely comical too that some people can not stand the thought of people poking very big comulent holes in the claims of AI delivering what it claims to deliver. As if having skepticism is some how a way to discredit a person.

Re: Ten advances in mathematics and theoretical computer science

#590

Post by 2001zhaozhao »

gste wrote: post #571
Chance-Device wrote: post #105

Pretty cool. The impact of AI is getting undeniable, there aren’t many positions left to move the goalposts to at this stage, next they’ll have to be outside the stadium entirely. The sooner people can be broken out of their denial about all this the better, and we can start actually taking it seriously.

People will be broken out of their denial by actual economic growth. That's what this is all meant to be for... I think we might start seeing some surprising numbers.

Would something like "services deflation" even show up in the numbers? That's what I'd expect to happen first
Post reply on HN