johnsmith1840

So solving and discovering math is or is not the core value a mathematician provides?

If AI can perfectly replicate their work but faster and better then what?

SWE have nobody crying for them as they've been massively disrupted.

Fun suggestion, thanks!

It's a reasonable take.

I think there's an important part which is that the nature of the beast implies there's effectively zero way to do that.

They have no idea what context, triggering this pathway, was from this guys reddit post 4 years ago.

I also assume that if any AI lab could actually do that it'd be an instant pissing context over who gives who credit the mostest. "This software engineer wrote a sick sorting algorthm everyone now uses, thank you random dude for that training contribution"

Maybe we will in the future, maybe we'll learn that the solution to this prize is from 3 peoples schizo rant on reddit a decade ago. Would be kinda sick actually.

So...why can't an AI do the exact same thing? Make AI so it understands math better for future math to understand more math.

Unless your argument is that mathematicians are effectively useless?

I am assuming that's not your point though.

Ok so if no plagarism has occured here in any sense then there's no discussion here?

I agree though if they did plagarism it's really really bad for OpenAI. They would instantly have evaporated all remaining good will to gloat over a stolen discovery.

So what happens to this world view when AI not only clears the forest of problems we couldn't solve but also in the future discovers more forest with trees bigger than anything we've ever seen before?

Not sure what the point of this argument is. Do we have mathematics for the sake of mathematicians good mental health and career or to solve and discover novel problems? Why should we care if mathematicians can understand proofs if they are correct?

If this is V0.5 of AGI/ASI then by V1 the only system that will be understanding any of this is the AI itself. If AI creates a new field of mathematics month 1, then solutions to new problems in month 2, then another field of mathematics on top of that at month 3 there's no human who will ever keep up with that.

Or the alternative is a flattening of abilities, the AI cannot proceed further than the collective intelligence of humans and in that case this is correct. We'd be in a future where nobody wants to work in a field with an AI dominating it and when AI hits the limit of no useful training data input we'd have this giant gap of nobody know wtf it's done for years and nobody willing to figure it out and advance it.

Ooo here's a dytopian story: - AI gets better at everything humans do - humans stop trying - AI cannot improve anymore than its input data + human support - AI slowly degrades itself (model collapse) for decades, it slowly hallucinates little by little until its hallucinating entire scientific fields losing quality over time - there's a mass population of people in the future who never learned to do anything and now have to relearn and figure out the equivalent of 100k years of AI work in order to prevent its slow degredation while all the systems they've come to rely on start failing around them. The AI has solved every problem but every real solution is saturated with 1000 false ones. - humanity starts from scratch?

I love the idea of an archive of every solution to every problem existing but it's impossible to figure out the correct one. Infinite library like!

AI didn't "take" anything. An openai researcher did?

The solution is also different to theirs? Literally no evidence of plagarism?

I mean, hasn't it always been this way? If something valuable is within reach and you disclose it, someone else might reach for it?

Just because the length of the arm is longer with an AI org doesn't mean it's somehow fundamentally a different system.

The future is that if you don't use AI your work is a lot easer to reach against someone else who has it.

That dude hand writing code with punchcards can be lapped by a 20yo with python, what's different?

100% not deterministic at the scale they run.

Sure? I mean the internet is just a bunch of wires and some networking code not magic but at the same completely life alteringly magical.

My logic is that you personally could never have accomplished this feat with all the non LLM tools and content in the world. These kinds of things imply these methods are stepping beyond human ability.

Sure we put walls around it and optimize but the interior of that optimization is not something we understand.

You now have access to a system that for a price could solve something you simply are unable to solve. Not something we programmed it to solve, something that has never been solved before.

Nobody gave it an example of this proof, that's magical.

Memory isolation having one tab or account open on your bank and another on this page does not mean it could leak across the sandbox and steal bank account details but anything inside of your general page content can be lost

Been running near identical tests for years now. Latest models are the only ones I don't throw away the results/code. Which is impressive, salvagable/usable is a giant step up.

A literal rock we carved patterns on and shot lightning into has accomplished something no human has.

How much more magical do you want this to be?

Tool or not it did something you could never have accomplished.

I've personally been facing this lately 5.6 at max effort and fable have done tasks for me that I previously that would be a nearly 6mo project and it took me a week. It also did it better than I would have.

The task was to build a high performance classification model. It not only helped make an entire data capture pipeline but also made the sythetic data basline needed. Then it proceeded to build and test 100 different model varients with methods and techniques I've never seen before. The results are basically SOTA based on the effeciency and compute contraints.

But this brings up something huge about these. I was there. I pushed the direction and work throughout it all. If it was entirely up to fable max or sol max the result would have been pretty bad.

All of these things are still chatgpt 3 scaled. It's identical even if the scale has gotten pretty wild. I could ask chatgpt 3 to make a single function and it worked well, 4o a file, 5, a small project, 5.6 far more, biggest improvements lately is they don't seem to get lost on long running tasks.

Is big gpt 3 AGI? I don't think so but perhaps scale can mimic it close enough our squishy brains fail to handle them correctly.

Yeah that's by far the most complex part.

Ever letter is it's own object and they stitch it into the visual view. When you type one letter is turns a single word into multiple objects all versioned objects.

Can't imagine all the crazy race condition protections baked into that.

You should go actually try to make any basic automation work around these systems.

They purposely obscured, google doc is another example they completly hide the dom!

I spent months fighting word processing systems and ended up shipping libre. There's almost zero alternatives without that becoming your entire company.

*that only microsoft has access to.

These guys puposely obscure controls and understanding of these products 100% to prevent you doing a port.

Just go open a microsoft word doc in the browser and look at the dom.

Despair! Horror!

If you've ever actually gone down this route you will try exactly this realize how much of a cluster f these products are and just use libre.

I did the exact same thing in my AI system. Spent an ENOURMOUS amount of time trying everything I could and in the end libre was the only thing even somewhat functional.

Easily 2 months of my life lost to these god forsaken systems. APIs and CLIs sound reasonable until you actually attempt anything in this space.

Computer use is exactly the same thing. Go try this: go to a google doc and dev tools check out the dom and now do the same for a word doc. Eye gouging pain of trying to get anything to work.

That's a good idea but it works from the change in context no? So you lose context from your big model. It's a good suggestion though.

Auto permission is what ya need.

I'm a heavy user and fable is great the #1 reason I stopped using it was the horrible safegaurd filter. I found sol close enough in capability and have only been blocked when my request was an obvious offensive cyber work. Fable blocked me on almost everything.

Optimizing a OS build? -> block

Securing a container -> block

60% is nowhere near enough for that safegaurd system. This just means I am going to be blocked half as much? Any long running task will likely get blocked.

Say you give a single big prompt and fable goes off for 6hrs of work. At hr 5 it gets blocked you now have the option of a much dumber model taking over and wrecking it or losing the entire 5hrs of work. That risk is beyond terrible and deffinetly not worth a 5-10% percieved improvement on my end. I previously would just bring sol in when that happened and realized sol is stupidly close in capability.

Once robots mature, yes. People will literally prompt buildings into existance.

I think that's more than 10yrs from now but if coding AGI or close enough to it becomes real robotics will also accelerate.

"Robot are the commands you have been given dangerous?"

"You cannot control legs for this task"

"You have 1 min for this task"

"You can only make suggestions for this task"

Anonymize identity best you can.

That's not that scary.

Nah, there's an obvious reason figure made splashy announcement of people cleaning homes with recording devices strapped to their heads.

Chatgpt had the internet.

Robots do not. Translating video is promising but obviously not enough.

Robots will likely never "explode" like chatgpt. They're gonna be a slow long term project requiring massive capitol to get the data.

It's a customer funnel. They've been attempting a similar product for years and nobody cares.

Did you read the model hack that occured on their platform? I wouldn't exactly call them "advanced" if their security practices are anything to go by.

Code is hard but more likely it is a brand thing which is much harder to do. Nvidia for years now has tried to get a public ai model hub of sorts working. This is obviously them throwing in the towel.

It's such an obvious customer funnel they have been trying for years to make.

1. Customer googles "some model" 2. Hugging face is often top result 3. Thinks it's great 4. Buys

The customers are already on hugging face.

Acting like code is the blocker here would be very wrong. Nvidia 200% has the technical knowhow to make a hugging face platform and they'd likely make it better.

I think yes but on different categories. First one I imagine is robotics control and support.

"This robot is having trouble folding a tshirt help it out for 1$"

Unless they go the waymo route of highly trusted people but I think mass deployed robots are a bit safer than a car for this.

So what if none of that happens? Say 10yrs from now it's basically the same as now, would you change your opinion?

And go where?

I use waymo all the time? It's literally here. I massively prefer it to a cab. Only question left is how long it takes to scale and make cheap.

Prolly what, 30yrs? Places like SV or other advanced locations will hit majorty faster than that. The rest of the world ~50yrs.

Hype is fast but tech is a decades rollout. AI will hit its stride in 5-10yrs. Which is scary because it's already stupidly powerful. Saturation of AI though is still a 20yr+ horizon.