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

Mathematical methods and human thought in the age of AI

arxiv.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 102 posts

Re: Mathematical methods and human thought in the age of AI

#81

Post by areyousure »

gettingoverit wrote: post #66

In fact, the paper has an error in the argument that AI might find Fermat's theorem to be incorrect due to definition of natural numbers including a zero, because paper's version of a theorem explicitly says that the number should be greater than two, and zero cannot be greater than two. Surprisingly, this mistake proves the author's point that human can implicitly understand what was said, and that it still has valu…

The paper explicitly states that n is greater than 2, but the issue is whether a,b,c can be 0.

Re: Mathematical methods and human thought in the age of AI

#83

Post by jkhdigital »

slopinthebag wrote: post #77
tim333 wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In democracies people can vote in control of the government to benefit themselves, unlike private monopolies. Corrupt autocracies get much criticism.

The amount of political control individuals have in a democracy is much less than people think. I get to vote every few years for a small preselected handful of representatives, none of whom represent me or my views, and that vote is usually meaningless anyways. In my political life none of the parties I have voted for have won an election. So tell me how much control of the government do I have? How much do any of u…

[dead]

Re: Mathematical methods and human thought in the age of AI

#84

Post by bluecheese452 »

mchinen wrote: post #20
bluecheese452 wrote: post #4

Enough Terence Tao spam.

I haven't seen any negative sentiment toward Terence Tao before. Coming from outside the academic math sphere, genuinely curious if there's a real issue or if this comment is just spam itself.

I have nothing against the guy. What I don’t like is seeing 50 hacker news posts about him every week.

Re: Mathematical methods and human thought in the age of AI

#85

Post by chromacity »

shafoshaf wrote: post #38
chromacity wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you serious? People get upset about losing jobs because they need jobs to pay their bills. Further, we often build our life identities around work; if you're a good car mechanic or a successful restaurant owner, you're proud of that. It's a part of you. Having to repeatedly restart your career is risky, painful, and demoralizing. I have no problem seeing why people don't like that and why it can lead to populist…

I don't think the point is that the transition isn't difficult. It is that there is an overall benefit that outweighs the challenges of the transition. The sad part is that industrializing societies have not been very good at reconciling the benefits with the costs. The benefits first go to a select few and have seeped out to the masses slowly. Railroads in the US are a good example. The wealth accumulated by the Van…

> I don't think the point is that the transition isn't difficult. It is that there is an overall benefit that outweighs the challenges of the transition.

In the abstract, sure. But not when you're on the receiving end. It's like with NIMBYism: we all roll our eyes at NIMBYs until it's actually our own backyard. You're not going to convince a coal miner that they're better off learning to code. You're not going to convince a software engineer that they're better off in the mines.

Re: Mathematical methods and human thought in the age of AI

#86

Post by mxkopy »

schmidtleonard wrote: post #33
cowpig wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "free market" is often used as a dogma against companies that are actively harmful to society This is a predominantly America-specific piece of propaganda, and it's pretty recent. Adam Smith's ideas are primarily arguments against mercantilism (e.g. things like using tariffs to wield self-interested state power), something he showed to be against the common good. The "invisible hand" concept is used to show how sel…

> arguments against mercantilism It has been funny to watch the rise of "China is beating us" rhetoric against the steady backdrop of "mercantilism is obsolete/bad" dogma, because the elephant in the room is that China has been running a textbook mercantilist playbook.

I mean they did execute a wealthy banker a couple years ago. So I think the mercantile class occupies a different place in society there than in America

Re: Mathematical methods and human thought in the age of AI

#87

Post by hammock »

zitterbewegung wrote: post #55
woolion wrote: post #7

> We assert that artificial intelligence is a natural evolution of human tools developed throughout history to facilitate the creation, organization, and dissemination of ideas, and argue that it is paramount that the development and application of AI remain fundamentally human-centered. While this is a noble goal, it seems obvious that this isn't how it usually goes. For instance, "free market" is often used as a do…

Not even sure if AI was ever "human-centered" . DARPA funded a large amount of AI reseearch from even the 1960s. The DART tool used in the Gulf War made back all of their previous investments. [1] [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dynamic_Analysis_and_Replannin...

I mean were computers themselves ever human-centered? What’s the difference between AI and a computer?

Re: Mathematical methods and human thought in the age of AI

#88

Post by hammock »

yoyohello13 wrote: post #64
logicchains wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It eventually becomes so big and inefficient that it gets overtaken by new competitors.

A Monopoly implies an organization powerful enough to stop competition. Seems like this solution that relies on competitors is fatally flawed. If there are enough competitors to meaningfully compete then there isn't a monopoly.

Insert better horse/car analogy here

Re: Mathematical methods and human thought in the age of AI

#89

Post by palmotea »

nutjob2 wrote: post #58
palmotea wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Like all technology before it AI will improve most people's lives. 1. Let's be clear: what you're describing is faith. 2. And what are you smoking to assert " all technology before ... AI [improved] most people's lives"?

> 1. Let's be clear: what you're describing is faith. And what I am countering is not? You can easily argue technology generally improves lives. Is it optimal? Beyond abuse? No. Does it have unintended consequences? Yes. Are we better of without it? No. > 2. And what are you smoking to assert "all technology before ... AI [improved] most people's lives"? OK social media is an unmitigated disaster, I'll give you that.…

>> 1. Let's be clear: what you're describing is faith.

> And what I am countering is not? You can easily argue technology generally improves lives. Is it optimal? Beyond abuse? No. Does it have unintended consequences? Yes. Are we better of without it? No.

The faith part is assuming it will always turn out as well as it has in the past. But every technology is different, and the patterns of the last 100-200 years are not some fixed law.

Look at each technology and its characteristics with fresh eyes, and think of the consequences without that assumption. That's not faith.

> But, for example, nukes have given us the longest period of relative peace in history.

I think celebrating nuclear weapons is a bit premature. A non-zero chance of obliteration over a long enough period of time becomes a near-certainty.

Re: Mathematical methods and human thought in the age of AI

#90

Post by palmotea »

Izikiel43 wrote: post #80
esafak wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It could actually turn out that AI sacrifices 100 engineering jobs for 10 low-level service or prostitution jobs and a crap-ton of wealth to those already rich. That's where wealth redistribution (Taxation) comes in. The USA is not good at progressive taxation, but everyone could be better off if it were implemented properly.

> The USA is not good at progressive taxation The top 10 percent of incomes pay 76% of all income taxes, the top 5% pays around 55% of all income tax. I would say it’s pretty progressive.

> The top 10 percent of incomes pay 76% of all income taxes, the top 5% pays around 55% of all income tax.

> I would say it’s pretty progressive.

That's a lesson in misleading statistics. Inequality has risen to absurd levels, and just keeps getting worse. It's not "pretty progressive."

Post reply on HN