Davidzheng

I think now it's a good time for people to work on the Riemann hypothesis. There are actually a lot of ideas, no one knows if any of them goes anywhere--but I don't think it's completely impossible to make progress especially with new tools haha.

You're not alone, even among mathematicians.

I do think something does happen/change when we reach superintelligence.

Maybe 4 year olds already have the brain power to learn to drive if they so desired.

I think I'm mostly on your side (also I believed early it would get here), but what does it mean to "solve the field"? I'm pretty much as bullish as you get on AI but I'm sure I can come up with questions AI cannot solve. I think the space of problems in math is so large and the distribution of proof lengths so heavy-tailed, there's probably no way without dyson-sphereing the sun to solve all easy to state problems.

surely the LLM can do that. It is RL'd against some reward, if the known strategies are clearly suboptimal with easy improvement, it'll find it most likely

It's honestly just good at math. Even at theory building i wouldn't put it below 90 percentile. Just on some things it's superhuman already and some not yet.

Absolutely not the right way to deal with a rogue super intelligence. At a minimum it could implement some dead man switch when it's out and knows about impending kill switch

I believe this is false. They hack bc hacking has nontrivial initial probability (within range of behavior seen in pretraining) and that probability is being heavily rewarded in RL post training

Yeah I agree, probably can't survive off regular consumer hardware or most non AI datacenters.

Market equilibrium probably tends to give 100% resource to ai building bc it leads to most returns and all human labor goes to zero.

Caveat I know nothing about economics lol--but this is my uninformed opinion.

Actually capitalism kind of has to end further down this road if we don't want to cede control completely to super intelligent ais and their direct "owners".

Doesn't it just incentive the business to be outcompeted by one that uses ai more--unless the consumer is choosing based on morals

??? Why

It can use the compute of the computers it hacks.

There's also huge market pressures and probably large negative economic consequences of a slowdown--probably better than what would happen without it, but it helps keep the pressure just as much as fear of competition

Tbh it won't really matter soon.

the second part is definitely not true

Oai denies looking at prompts but doesn't deny training on them.

Soon it won't be like this!

But i don't understand what OAI is offering in the first offer to allow them to believe they can demand that? Not publishing before Tristan? If they really beat Tristan to the publication i would consider it truly morally corrupt conduct so i feel like you can't make an offer like if you give me something i won't be totally corrupt

"Buckmaster and Alpöge think they have found a counterexample for Navier-Stokes, but the paper is not yet presentable. "

Are you sure about this? I'm far far from the area but it doesn't look like it to me on first viewing (hypo-dispersive seems like a sizable difference to me and not covered in the clay prize description)

It's honestly unsurprising and not a problem that they do this in my view. The problem really starts when you start taking credit for work that they would've achieved.

Like if i go to a talk on unfinished work, it's not really unethical for me to think about the problem--it's a problem if i scoop the authors but these problems can often be solved by collaboration or proper crediting and timing--IN MY VIEW

But Tristan doesn't even want to be credited for the millennium prize--does he? He wanted to be the first to solve it and got scooped (which ig is not a great look for OAI ethically but also not forbidden). And the only reading for her of asking to remove levent must be in light of this offer (to credit him for millennium prize) right? It's not like they can ask him to remove levent from the main papers without this offer(what would Tristan gain?)

My guess is that OAI tried to be "generous" and offered to share credit on millennium with Tristan but not Levent. And Tristan got understandably offended by this offer (which probably oai felt like was the right thing to offer but they couldn't really offer to do the most ethical thing for some reason) and then the random conflicts and weird threats started.

Is that version of NS Tristan stated enough for the clay prize? I thought the main gripe is Tristan claimed that OAI is stealing their approach. Or that they shouldn't try to scoop a result which he expects to complete soon. But I stand to be corrected if you know whether the version he referred to is indeed enough for millennium prize.

I don't even understand the conflict tbh. Probably I'm just dense. Tristan is not claiming NS, just a huge advance which may solve NS soon. OAI is claiming NS and willing to credit Tristan for the ideas and publish after.

Oai offers two options, the second Tristan views as dishonest. But Tristan rejects the first, why? Because he thinks it's theft? But then why would OAI threaten him?

I hope credit assignment just dies--it's too much drama.

Please don't say brute forced. It sounds like some form of denial or something. Compute for hard problems drops with models--it just means they threw a huge amount of compute. There's (idk about NS specifically so maybe it's exception) no real way to "brute force" a math proof [ok you can enumerate proofs if you can wait until heat death ]

Sorry for random rant but I don't think these statements help your point

slowing can also make sense if you know you're running full force into a bomb or a wall even if other are close behind.

i think it was mostly a fluke

I think it's possible. You envision humanity acting as one in such a crisis. But it may be unclear when it's too late to act and before then many people can have too much to lose to act.