Hacker News Reader

Comment by hn3er1q | Hacker News Reader

There are many similarities in your comment to how grandmasters discuss engines. I have a hunch the arc of AI in math will be very similar to the arc of engines in chess.

https://www.wired.com/story/defeated-chess-champ-garry-kaspa...

View on HN

I agree with that, in the sense that math will become more about who can use AI the fastest to generate the most theories, which sort of side-steps the whole point of math.

As a chess aficionado and a former tournament player, who didn’t get very far, I can see pros & cons. They helped me train and get significantly better than I would’ve gotten without them. On the other hand, so did the competition. :) The average level of the game is so much higher than when I was a kid (30+ years ago) and new ways of playing that were unthinkable before are possible now. On the other hand cheating (online anyway) is rampant and all the memorization required to begin to be competitive can be daunting, and that sucks.

Hey I play chess too. Not a very good player though. But to be honest, I enjoy playing with people who are not serious because I do think an overabundance of knowledge makes the game too mechanical. Just my personal experience, but I think the risk of cheaters who use programs and the overmechanization of chess is not worth becoming a better player. (And in fact, I think MOST people can gain satisfaction by improving just by studying books and playing. But I do think that a few who don't have access to opponents benefit from a chess-playing computer).

Reply on news.ycombinator.com