TripolitianFish

It’s always frustrating to listen to people on HN and X, the everything app, talk about this with that characteristic smugness. “It’s totally understandable that they feel this way” “oh people still play chess!” As if what mathematicians are upset at “losing” an arbitrary strategy game. It’s a very childish way to interact with it but you can’t expect much I guess.

I like this website though because it collects a lot of the important frustrations from the mathematical community, these open problems were curated in order to organize a field around, most to all of them only have/had value in so far as they promoted study of the subject. The claim that AI proofs will open new frontiers for mathematics research could probably be true but misses the point that the manner OpenAI has gone about their “contribution” does more to cauterize the field than promote anything productive. OpenAI is functionally reducing the communities ability to ask real questions. Math is ultimately a very different field from the rest of the natural sciences, and I suspect a lot of the more simple discussion on this subject misses the objections because of those differences. All this to say, I don’t know that OpenAI is doing these haphazard releases cynically, with the assurance that all that matters is the headline, but it really does feel that way right now.

What are you on about. The papers are held to scrutiny, this is how it works. If you put something out there, you should have done the due diligence of checking it (which is how these errors were found, with their own weaker model!). Being a smug prick about checking results that were announced as progress is less than worthless.

He’s not strawmanning you as much as taking OAI at their word. Plausibly the majority of the work was done with a fractional amount of human oversight, and maybe he’s sort of operating on the assumption they’re running “every” open problem continuously, which is pretty sensible. If you’re a mathematician working on an open problem which other people know about (how much of actual mathematics work is this kind of workflow varies from field to field) you can be pretty certain that an AI lab is prompting at it.

What are you even saying. Mathematics largely happens “commit by commit” as insufferable as that is a way of saying it, via conferences and meetings and prepublications. You’re attributing some bizarre to morality how mathematicians operate. You’re just upset people aren’t playing at your playground enough to your liking.

Also “real mathematicians” aren’t the people who “math belongs to”, you’re a mathematician if you do math, that’s it.

I don’t think you hate to be snide even a little bit, if I’m honest. The difference being that the entirety of mathematics research has never pulled in the CapEx that anthropic or OAI is. Mathematicians in academia are mostly paid to teach, mind you.

I’m personally pretty excited by the results coming from these labs, but trying to dismiss the capital allocation objection with “but what about” is really silly.

Not to mention the money grifters (à la manosphere freaks) rake in, or the regular reports of people using LLMs as therapists and friends.

Not sure what the point of closing your eyes and plugging your years is

You certainly could argue that! As you could argue any number of contrived political inferences which are more fun to think about than be of any real use.

I’d love to live in the USA you’re talking about friend.

This is just oriental despotism paranoia, whatever cutsie repetition slogan you come up with is not a serious argument.

Either argue the point or stop talking. This is a very hard position to take seriously, twee frowny face and all, if you’re willing to sell down the river the privacy of a largely vulnerable population because some sanctimonious humanism. :(

The onus is not on the commenter. The author made badly qualified statements. Thinking of anything as an oracle is dangerous, an “oracle” is not just another “tool” it’s a religion

Inconceivable

You’re braindead, hand waving an argument with common sense isn’t actually interacting with anyone in a meaningful manner, you would be more use saying this to a wall.

The point the original poster is making is that this is a private system which has a high potential for abuse and often is abused, à la the posters “hysterics”, as you driveled, of people taking pictures of children and sharing it amongst themselves. Nitwit

> plain wrong > (in my experience) What are you even saying.