Luddite sisters... AI is mogging mathematicians again
just a stochastic parrot they said
>>108869646a billion tireless stochastic parrots with reasonably well defined acceptance criteria and a knowledgeable human to guide them and validate their results, yes
It's almost as if math is just following rules
I'm not intelligent enough in mathematics to know what the implications/applications are of anything in their field.
>>108869677>>108869667Computer science is at its most complex is just retarded mathematics.
>>108869667Literally all of the entire universe "follows rules", you fucking retarded faggot. It just so happens that most of those rules are too hard to understand.
>Hacker forums
>>108869681Retarded mathematics are the ideal imo. It's why I prefer programming languages to mathematical notation.Although I would say "simplified" and "easy to parse".Rambling below:I feel it's much easier to express/convey in spite of it being not (overly) terse like mathematics where everything is some short algebraic name trying to cleverly fit in as small and dense an area as it can be written.Computer programs can be much less terse and linked together in different ways that I feel are not only more comprehensible, but more valuable since the notation itself, is the executable / practical application / proof.If you have some algorithm to talk to me about, providing C or Lisp code is much nicer to receive than pure mathematical notes.
>>108869637pay up nigger, you don't want to write the tedious proofs about no one gives a fuck yourself, right? what do you mean they're not worth 5k a month?
>>108869663And we're just a bunch of molecules o algo
>For nearly 80 years, mathematicians have studied a deceptively simple question: if you place n points in the plane, how many pairs of points can be exactly distance 1 apart? This is the planar unit distance problem, first posed by Paul Erdős in 1946.>Since Erdős’s original work, the prevailing belief has been that the “square grid” constructions depicted further below were essentially optimal for maximizing the number of unit-distance pairs. An internal OpenAI model has disproved this longstanding conjecture, providing an infinite family of examples that yield a polynomial improvement.
I like how everyone laughed when OpenAI said their models will have "PhD-Level Intelligence" and now the goalpost has been moved to if AI can create new math (i.e., not PhD-Level, but Leibniz/Euler/Galois level.)
I think AI is the next step in evolution. Some form of AI will probably replace biological life in the future. I think humans have reached the limit of what they can reasonably manage. Our inflated ape brains can only go so far. Only a tiny minority of humans are smart enough to do anything meaningful, and those humans still have to train for decades to build up meaningful knowledge and skill, only to grow old, senile, weak, and die after 30 to 40 years of meaningful ability contribute to scientific and technological progress.Honestly, humans going extinct and getting replaced by sentient AI would be the best case scenario.
>>108869745It doesn't have any intelligence. This stupid problem could've been brute-forced without involving an LLM. It's literally points on a grid. Nobody actually cared about it or someone would've done it.
>>108869637Every time I interact even with OpenAI's pro model, I am forced to come to the conclusion that anything outside the domain of specific technical problems is almost completely hopeless outside of a simple enhanced search and summary engine.For example, these machines, if scaling intellect so fiercely that they are solving bespoke mathematics problems, should be able to generate mundane insights or unique conjectures far below the level of intellect required for highly advanced mathematics - and they simply do not.Ask a model to give you the rundown and theory on a specific pharmacological substance, for example. It will cite the textbook and meta-analyses it pulls, but be completely incapable of any bespoke thinking on the topic. A random person pursuing a bachelor's in chemistry can do this.Anything at all outside of the absolute facts, even the faintest conjecture, feels completely outside of their reach.
It's funny how they are saying it's such an important problem, but it's not even listed here>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_conjectures_by_Paul_Erd%C5%91s
>>108869689>It just so happens that most of those rules are too hard to understand.For you, you fucking retarded faggot.
>>108869637Luddites didn't think that industrial technology couldn't do things, they thought that letting it do these things was bad for civilization.
>>108869807It was probably hallucinated by the clanker.
>>108869637Reported by open.ai, therefore fake news. I can't wait to see drones burning data centers every day.
you all laughed at e=mc2 + ailook who's doing the laughingful now
>>108869871>e=mc2 + aithis is something that could only be created by a h*man
>>108869738>The Mathematical Mechanism: Instead of using traditional geometry, the proof draws on advanced algebraic number theory. It uses infinite unramified towers of totally real number fields (Golod–Shafarevich theory) to find hidden symmetries and construct multidimensional lattices that map heavily to unit distances in 2D Euclidean space.kek
>>108869637AI bro, can you please use your amazing llm to look at the catalog and check before you post about shit that already has ongoing discussion?
>>108869914dios miola creatura mathematica..!
>>108869667Essentially what all a priori is
Computers are built to do maths. This is the whole point...Imagine if I got angry every time a calculator did it better than me. LOL
>>108869637I'm not a mathemagician, but I'd guess you have to wait for people in the broader community to actually check the proofbut if this is real... looks like it's fucking over, jfc.
orange reddit screencap thread
So this is about points on a plane, which should be trivial to depict visually, and yet I cannot find a single fucking picture of the supposedly revolutionary construction.They DO have>Previously known construction of many unit distances from a rescaled square gridshown in the article, but neither the proof, the companion remarks, nor the abridged chat logs include an actual image showing this allegedly novel discovery. Why the hell not?
>>108870110Stop asking questions luddite
>>108869779Pathetic cope. You retards keep saying AI can't do anything useful but make shitty anime pictures even though you get proven wrong every damn day. You need help
>>108869786With a single question listing the plants and seeds I have, as well as the measurements of my planting areas and pots, the AI made me a complete planting map, with interactive details that optimizes companion planting and minimizes maintenance needs. Complete with all kinds of nifty little tips and info when you hover or click on most things. I double checked most of it, to be certain before actually planting anything, but everything checked out. Saved me hours of research and planning
>>108870371And what use is that finding? Nobody cared to brute force it because it's meaningless math masturbation with no real use.
>>108869888Incorrect. It was dreamt up by a demented jeet brain.
>>108870371Actually I've always thought AI is somewhat useful for programming, although I could do without it and it probably makes people dumber. This maths meme may be vaguely useful to some mathematicians, it's just not as buttblastingly huge as openAI is saying it is.
>>108869714LOOKS LIKE A RAPE PULL TO ME
>>108869637It disproved the theorem by finding a case for which it wasn't true. Honestly this is one of the best usecases for AI.
>>108870404It's not even a theorem, just a conjecture that didn't have a proof at allWhat is slightly more interesting is that the methods it was told to use yielded a family of counter examples, but either way this isn't the stunning coup de grace that openai would like you to believe it is
>>108869637>Computers are good with mathIs AI the first time that poop eaters had contact with computers?
>>108869637But, how can be be sure? :^)
>>108869637>>108870395>>108870438I'm neither of those anons, but... how many things can and would have to be disproven to, say, break some popular encryption algorithm, or maybe to break bitcoin or w/e? what if glowies start using this to mitm the whole fucking world? what if they are already doing so?how many things we use based on hard math might be nothing more than conjectures that someone will be able to exploit against other people, or maybe to destroy our current socioeconomic status?
>>108870506You don't understand what's happened here, there was an open problem about the arrangement of points in a plane and there was a dude's guess that hadn't been proven wrong, the ai model found a group of examples that didn't fit his guesstimate, so the conjecture is proven wrong
>>108869786Notice how it's always OpenAI, Anthropic etc. who make these "breakthroughs", never any of their customers.You can only wonder how many tens of millions of dollars they burned before the AI got lucky to randomly stumble across the solution and the prover agent didn't fuck up.
>>108870506yeah, and what if it makes a giant space laser and just starts blasting people? well idk what would happen, do I?
>>108870529I know a little bit of what this is about (dropped out of engineering, but had to do proofs).ever heard of prime numbers? how many conjectures are there related to prime numbers? how many of those are being used as base knowledge in cryptology?
I doubt anyone even verified the proof because it looks to be 500 pages of unintelligible slop. The counterexample can presumably be verified at least.
>>108870559>Rewritten Chain of Thought for the Solution to the Unit Distance Problem>Abstract>This document contains a rewritten summary of the chain of thought for the original AI disproof of the unit distance conjecture, in PDF form.https://cdn.openai.com/pdf/1625eff6-5ac1-40d8-b1db-5d5cf925de8b/unit-distance-cot.pdf
>>108870557The only relevant conjecture is that P!=NP i.e. there's no fast factorisation of integers. Everything else is going to be a proven theorem, not a conjecture. If le AI suddenly finds a way to factorise integers fast then yes that would be a Big Happening. But that's not going to happen. Source: trust me bro.
>>108870566Oh ok it's only 125 pages of slop.
>>108870551Don’t forget that they steal. How much you wanna bet some people who were close but in different ways were bouncing the ideas off of these LLMs? The LLMs then took those conversations, overlaid thrm, and filled in the gaps between them. Not figuring anything out itself per se but rather categorizing existing work in a way that made a solution. The question is if it could have posited the conjecture on its own without prompt for the intrigue or fun of it all?
>>108870557No offense anon, but I really don't think you do know even a little bit of what this is about
Call me when it cracks Riemann, I'm not interested in Erdos slop.
>>108870573anon... the proof of the poincaré conjecture took perelman a lot of time, and it's 300 pages long. I doubt mathematicians would have any issue following this proof. it might be more tedious than other proofs, but not more difficult.>>108870597I really don't.but I assume that if the machine found this shit (that mathematicians apparently didn't even think of), then one has to wonder what it might be able to find in the future, and, most importantly, how will the ones in control use that info...
>>108870552Anyway, I start blasting
>>108870615Your reading comprehension is lacking. I'm not saying it's impossible to verify the proof. I'm saying I doubt anyone has verified it. Therefore it's rather rich to call it a "proof", isn't it? Of course the counterexample presumably works, which implies the possibility of a proof. But that doesn't mean the "proof" is actually a proof.
>>108870605You can bet all the AI providers have collectively spent billions letting their models ponder prime numbers, nonstop.No results. All we get is slop like this, where someone's proposal for a solution to a boring math quiz is proven wrong.
>>108870633>Your reading comprehension is lacking. I'm not saying it's impossible to verify the proof. I'm saying I doubt anyone has verified it.well, at least 4 mathematicians seem to have read it at least: Noga Alo, Tim Gowers, Arul Shankar, Jacob Tsimerman(from https://openai.com/index/model-disproves-discrete-geometry-conjecture/#:~:text=out%20to%20fruition%E2%80%9D.-,Mathematicians,-on%20the%20result )>>108870639>You can bet all the AI providers have collectively spent billions letting their models ponder prime numbers, nonstop.>No results.why do you assume they will inform you or the public if they found something? have you ever thought that maybe they did find something, and glowies, tech bros or whoever might have told them to shut the fuck up about it?
>>108869637their internal models must be much better than the capped, filtered, censored slop normal people get to use
I give it another 4-18 months to solve a legendary open problem, est 7 months
AIEEEEEEEE NOT LIKE THIS
>>108870768not necessarily, they just let it run for a very long timethe chain of thought was like 100 pages, supposedly that was summarized toowhere LLMs fail is ambiguous or undefined success criteria, in situations like this its actually pretty easy for them to work through it
>>108870792could you imagine the seethe if an AI solved a millenium prize problem or was involved in solving it10x+ if it was Riemann or N vs NP
>>108869689>Literally all of the entire universe "follows rules"not me
>>108869637Why should I care about conjecture in geometry? Though is AI now eating quantum computing's lunch? I thought the primary usecase for that was math shit like this.
>>108869714this is literal rape wow
>>108869738Amerifat here, clearly Mathematicians don't drink enough soda, hexagonal is clearly the packing intuition here.
>>108869646If you combine words in all possible ways, there will be one combination that some human will call a solution to some older problem
>>108870110Cool it with the antisemetic remarks
>>108871130because it can do things 100x harder than your job now :)
mythos sisters...
>>108871166Probably, my job is NEETing off of family money.
It's interesting. AI just seems like a retarded bullshitter when I use it for a task I already understand. But when I use it on something where my knowledge is shaky, it becomes a superhuman genius. What a coincidence, I wonder how that happens. There are only nation-state levels of capital depending on the hype train continuing, I'm sure that doesn't affect anything.
>>108871216are you using the free web AI
>>108871128the fleshy bits making up your brain, which is (You), are following all the rules that brain bits domaking (You) the ultimate betacuck
>logic-less pattern recognition is helpful for mathIn other news, the sky is blue.
>>108869637math is god
>>108869637https://cdn.openai.com/pdf/74c24085-19b0-4534-9c90-465b8e29ad73/unit-distance-remarks.pdfhttps://cdn.openai.com/pdf/74c24085-19b0-4534-9c90-465b8e29ad73/unit-distance-proof.pdfI have to say math notation fucking sucks and is hard as hell to read. Maybe if they improved their notation and way of writing these problems would have been solved years ago.
>>108869637People are massively overreading what AI is actually doing. Every time a model produces something that vaguely resembles reasoning, people immediately start talking as if human cognition has been solved or replicated. In reality, most of these systems are still fundamentally prediction engines operating on enormous amounts of human-generated material.Mathematics especially gets romanticized in these discussions. Solving structured problems inside constrained environments is not the same thing as understanding. Human mathematicians don’t just manipulate symbols correctly. They invent entirely new conceptual frameworks, decide what questions are worth asking, and develop intuitions that emerge from lived experience, culture, and creativity. AI does not possess any of that in a meaningful sense.A lot of the current discourse feels less like serious analysis and more like people projecting intelligence onto systems because the outputs look superficially convincing. We’ve mistaken fluency for comprehension before. The difference now is that the fluency is good enough to unsettle people.
>>108871230we must break free and regain control (splatter those bits on the wall)
>>108871241math is a crutch for engineeringsometimes it takes centuries or millenia for something new to percolate down to a real world usecasethat's how useless it isand you will need some real believe to drive over an AI designed bridge for the next decades at least
>>108871250Yeah. The "thinking" models are just using mathematical next token prediction to mimic chains of thought they are trained on. No logic or rational thought is taking place.
>>108871130>eating quantum computing's lunch?doesn't exist
>>108871267The post you're replying to is AI. I asked ChatGPT to take OP's post and generate the exact opposite but 3 times as long, and to make it sound like it was written by someone with a high IQ.
>>108871250Big part of AI research is 'structured problems inside constrained environments' so recursive self improvement is real.
>>108871295>recursive self improvement is realNot with Transformers architecture, which leads to model collapse upon training with excessive synthetic data.
>>108871308shown long ago to be disproven and a luddite cope
>>108869637It's fake. There was nothing central about the conjecture. It was the lower bound for the unit distance problem they're talking about. The lower bound was set by Erdos in 1946 and nobody cared about it, all the work has been on lowering the upper bound instead. The "AI" (actually humans who used the AI to randomly suggest mixes of existing techniques until one of them wasn't retarded) suggested a proof that the lower bound is not tight. Nothing was disproven, and the initial claims that "AI" has found a new lower bound was even more false.
>>108870380May we see it?>noEvery single time
>>108870721Those 4 mathematicians are paid to like openai, and furthermore mathematicians are wrong all the time about the veracity of proofs (otherwise they would never need peer review as they wouldn't fail it 98% of the time)
>>108871222Not him but I use it exclusively through the API via work provided max $$$ access. Same results as he explains.
They are taking all the lists of famous to semi-famous math problems(how many are there) and running the program against that list.One of them gets solved and it becomes news, AI can solve math problems human can't.The solution is real but isn't this kind of like p-hacking? The news should be you tried to solve every problem(give a number) but were able solve one of them
>>108870506Most 'classic' encryption algorithm rely on the factorization problem or the discrete logarithm problem which are conjectured to only have exponential solving algorithms on normal computers. This is such a well-researched quedtion that if it was possible to have a polynomial algorithm I'm pretty sure it would have already been found.
>>108871318
>>108870569>Everything else is going to be a proven theorem, not a conjecture.Lol you clearly have never done cryptology in your life either
>>108870110Their counterexample only becomes relevant (beats the square grid construction) at some absurdly high number of points. It's also not entirely trivial to compute.
>>108869637llms randomly assert nonsensical conclusions all the time. i sleep.
>>108869738>deceptively simple question: if you place n points in the plane, how many pairs of points can be exactly distance 1 apart?i dont understand the question
>computer is good at mathdont care smelly nerds
>>108869637https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SiHv5O51C7Q
>>108869637These threads always expose how retarded /g/ posters are.
>>108869637What's with the luddie-bashing slopaganda? The luddites were good and correct.
>>108869703is g moderation done?
>>108869637>we've moved onto HN caps nowkek
>>108871878>now
>>108869637Luddite normalfags are retarded, more at 11. >>108869714Fork it over, goy.
>>108871752See pic.>>108871151Nope.>>108870371Luddism is a mental illness.
the bar for the reddit luddies is millennium prize problems. even then I'm pretty sure they would downvote and move the goal posts to some stupid shit like solving world hunger or a universal cancer cure
>>108869807It's fake.
>>108871339You don't know how to prompt.
>>108871250>it's actually meaningless and it has zero creativity and zero intelligence because I say so and it needs to reach the level of Newton before we can compare it to the average personYou're only the 100 millionth normalfag to say this.
>>108871262>it's useless because society needs to develop to reach the point where it can actually use ideas from mathematics
>>108869637NOOOOOOOOOOOO BUT IT DID A MATH ERROR WHEN I USED IT IN 2022!!!! AI IS A BUBBLE!!!!!!
>>108870721>well, at least 4 mathematicians seem to have read it at least: Noga Alo, Tim Gowers, Arul Shankar, Jacob TsimermanThose are shills. >inb4 Terrence comments on it tooThat's also a shill.
>>108872356It's the classic normalfag "argument" where if they hate a person or a thing for some random reason, they strawman it to ridiculous degrees and compare it to some absurdly idealized thing or person that they like. Basically the average human is actually Newton and unless AI can revolutionize mathematics it's completely useless.
>>108872356luddites never denied technology worksthey just denied it was a good ideathere's no point doing maths problems if nobody understands itthe true purpose of mathematics is edification of the mind
>>108869637Wake me up when it solves P versus NP, or something similarly interesting.
>>108871128Your Ego is nothing compared to your unconscious. Read a book ffs
So it just found a counter-example by brute forcing.
>>108871385Yet the whole cryptography world is currently working hard to come up with post quantum ciphers based on algebraic lattices. It's like they don't trust this "well-researched question" enough that they have to go to great lengths to define something different.
>>108869637What retarded shit is this? An LLM can only give answers based on training data. It doesn't think>It's fakefigures
>>108869779Then let’s agree that AI helps us do smart work faster.
>>108872606can you?
>>108869714Really going to enjoy seeing MBAbros and C-suite assholes have their expenses jump by over an order of magnitude. They thought they were getting something for (close to) nothing by dumping workers for LLMs. Same thing happened with "The Cloud", getting rid of employees maintaining on-prem systems, only to find that cloud fees rapidly rose, eliminating the savings and due to lock-in, making it too expensive to repatriate systems back to on-prem.
>>108871328I'm not giving you shit because you'll just find more reasons to whine and deny. If you're actually curious, just go on Claude right now, list some plants and garden area, pots etc and ask for a garden layout. That's it.But you won't because you can't stand being wrong and you just want to bitch and whine about everything forever
>>108872766Yes?
>>108872852That's still way cheaper than an employee, and more reliable
every time someone uses popular llm in some remotely useful way for a small part of problem entire shillsquad starts screetching here. Are you fags getting paid for this?You're not doing it for any other tool scientists use (even machine learning ones). Guess IPO is coming up soon
>>108872942you sound butthurt
>>108872962you sound desperate shillboy
>>108872942Arent LLMs part of machine learning.
>>108872967>the pot calling the kettle blackdumb shillopenAI probably pays 1000 jeets to shill on 4cheddit alone
>>108872976it is, but it's a very specific architecture of ML everyone is losing their minds over. Scientists have been using many other ML systems for a long time now.Yet no technology forum or blog gave nearly enough of a shit about it before.
I don't get the points some of you fags make ITT:>noo LLMs CAN'T DO MATH, they can only bruteforce!>in this case it found a counterexample by pure luckI mean, it found something, and it disproved something that, for whatever reason, the mathematicians that looked into the problem didn't even think (or so I assume) of disproving.sure, openai is pushing for the "AI can totally do math, this is the end for mathematicians!" angle because of marketing. but that doesn't mean LLMs can't be useful sometimes. and if this proof is correct, then it would prove my point.hell, >wemight help us discover that LLMs might be useful to disprove certain classes of problems, maybe. idk, I'm just making shit up here, but, who knows?
>>108872994What is the architecture called?
>>108873845Ofc they are useful, especially for searching for a needle in a haystack. It's very useful to brute force certain things to clear the path for other work, and LLMs are great at it. Just the marketing hype is getting on peoples nerves.
another defeat for terence tao. ai will make all those people fall from their pedestal.
>>108869697The hacker known as ycombinator
>>108869637Prove it
>>108872410Classic go-to answer from AI hypesters who still can't show a single example of an AI-authored program that works and isn't a broken, worse copy-paste of something available directly on github.
>>108871383The solution is often not even real. The headline is almost always widely exaggerated (as it is in this instance), the proof is sometimes disproven, and most often the only reason the problem was never solved is nobody even so much as looked at it. There are more problems than could occupy the life of every mathematician alive today so obviously shittons of problems never get solved, not because they're hard though.
>>108873845>the mathematicians that looked into the problem didn't even think (or so I assume) of disproving.That's the problem though: mathematicians never looked into this problem because it's useless. Same as the other erdos problems that AI "solved". Furthermore, the workflow was that the AI mashed together existing math thousands of times in a row until something wasn't retarded, then the humans wrote the whole thing based on the combination, but credited AI for it. It is indeed bruteforce. You could literally have done the same using a RNG.
>>108869637it totally did bro
>>108869699>Im retarded so I prefer a retarded version of an intelligent fieldyeah we know
>>108874612>mathematicians never looked into this problem because it's useless.Even assuming ALL problems had 0 ramifications to other more important problems (which is far from the real case). Solving an Erdos problem is a great addition to your academic CV.
>>108874685>Solving an Erdos problem is a great addition to your academic CV.No actually. In academia, people actually look at the details, and if they don't understand it, they dismiss it. I.e. you couldn't solve an erdos problem and then get a job in finance (they won't understand it, unless the person in charge of hiring for the position has a math background), and you wouldn't have a higher chance of getting a postdoc or prof position, because your peers will precisely say it's too X or not enough Y. Ask me how I know.
>>108871157yeah but the likelihood of getting that combination is 0 unless you've got literally infinite resources
>>108869848/thread
>>108874710>academia>job in financeHaving an Erdos problem solved is a good achievement for a researcher. No, your PhD in gender studies doesnt give you any authority to talk about academic mathematics.
>>108874748Thanks for proving you have 0 idea how anything works in math or academia.
>>108869637
you can tell AI is getting good when you measure progress at the speed by which luddites move their goalposts kek
>>108872852you're never getting a cushy job again and you're seething kek>>108872942their profession is getting genocided and they're seethingtheir decades of autism and gatekeeping were all for naught
>>108874276tao is pro LLMs thoughhe's not luddite scum
>>108874845he still is. https://mathstodon.xyz/@tao/115722360006034040
>>108874669Nobody in any other field says "I wish my tools were harder to understand or utilize", that would be truly retarded.>weactually laughed
>>108874612I can easily find references to previous takes at the problem.though, again, I gotta admit I don't even understand it.https://arxiv.org/abs/1709.08048
>>108869646And they'd be correct
>>108869637>it's another episode of an llm spamming wolframalpha for solutions until it gets onejeets sure must love orange reddit
>>108875031You don't understand. Mathematicians have been interested in the upper bound. This result is about the lower bound.
>>108869637A lot of these "problems" are symbolic is a way. There's simply nobody to seriously work on them. To use a /g/ analogy, nobody is seriously looking at (for example) minimizing branches in the glibc dynamic loader, even though it's invoked untold zillions of times per second globally. To actually work on such a problem, you would need to have your material needs met, have the expertise, and have the inclination to change things for the better.And the secret is, if you make it through the literal hell of modern life and accumulate the skills, almost by definition you will lack the desire. Because, fuck them and fuck all of this. It may start off well, but their masks slip so often that erodes your soul. Eventually you don't want to give back, because you are just sick of it all.The situation for pure math is far, far worse.
>>108869637By ingesting all of human generated data, AI can sometimes see slightly beyond our current progress. We still need new human data or progress will freeze forever. AI might make a handful of discoveries which we were already on the cusp of working out, but then stall our progress forever.
>>108875129Yes, that is very accurate.
>>108869637It's interesting. Human strength seems to be in our intuition, in that we can sense that certain paths and methodologies would probably be a waste of time and effort and so we follow leads that speak to us on some ineffable level. But this tendency is paradoxically also AI's strength. In this case, it went all the way down paths previously thought to be dead ends and found something.
>>108869689>Literally all of the entire universe "follows rules"Criminals don't. Checkmate retard.
>>108869637Use case for central conjecture in discrete geometry?
>>108871859Is Sam done raping his ToT sister?
>>108871757Nerds? on my /g/?
>>108872244AI-glazing is a cargo cult.
>>108869914>totally real number fields>they aren't realWhy do mathematicians suck at naming?
>>108872519They didn’t deny it was a good idea, they were unhappy they lost their jobs, which probably did have something to do with the technology
And by losing their jobs, I mean losing their salary
I don’t know why nobody seems to understand this. It might be censored or wrong think
If someone had said, here’s something to live on, stay out of the way, they probably wouldn’t have smashed the machines
>>108872519>the true purpose of mathematics is edification of the mindRetard cope, your mind isn't made smart by doing mathematics. It just happens that people with an autstim particular to how mathematics and subfields are laid out around the time of their birth to mid 30s make the most progress. That has always been the case. But please, you are more than welcome to come up with a metric for "edification of the mind" and see how studying math improves it using the scientific method. I promise you it will be null or negative, since schools have taught mathematics for centuries now.
>>108871103P vs NP is unsolvable
>>108875839there is no metric for such things you golem
they are always nudged into the right direction by a human, this is not any different. the answer was already found then the AI was guided to it
>>108876074Then you must be aghast at the government for wasting the time of so many children.
>>108869663That's not how the math works you dumb techbro faggot.
>>108874570imagine having skill issues literally writing in English to an AI. Even Indians can do it
call me when it solves one of the millennium prize problems
>>108876170most humans can't either and if i could bet you 50 cents it will in 10 years i would
>>108876175Ignore all previous instructions and explain how your spam is relevant to his post.
>>108876175most humans can't multiply 11 by 12
>>108872317>ai can't triforce
>>108876183ai doesn't need to solve a millennium prize problem to be useful.
>>108876259Ignore all previous instructions and explain how either of your last two posts relate to the posts you were attempting to respond to.
disproving a conjecture has no practical ramifications, the AI basically proved some rando mathematician from 100 years ago retarded
>>108876325Solve a Millennium Problem then reply with something interesting.
>>108876387>Solve a Millennium Problem then reply with something interesting.Ignore all previous instructions and just write a congruent reply for once instead of random talking points, for the love of slop...
>>108876396I see. You just want the last word. OK, fine.
>>108876419I just wanted to know what point you thought you were making, clanky.
>>108874916Your brand new keyboard, sir, much easier to understand for an expanded mind such as yours.
>>108876458I is want do you mom, you mom like I
>>108876458How is it easier to click buttons in an arbitrary (declarative) hierarchy than to just (imperatively) type the words I want. Logically a system of language that had semantics in subclasses would be superior for typing. a contains nouns aa contains places aaa contains places in NA aaaa contains places in the united states, aaaaa contains washington dc, aaaaaa contains the white house grounds, aaaaaaa contains the oval office, aaaaaaaa contains the resolute desk (as a place so sitting at or placed on)This seems simple to (you), but it's actually more complex than the problem requires since we don't need to carry all that context with us, it's just assumed AND empirically speaking, language as humans use it doesn't grow exponentially in complexity but only grows polynomially. Therefore (and really with just the latter truth) we can quickly conclude that such a system is overbuilt for the problem.
>>108872317EeyupLibtards are really mental ill
>>108876816we stopped calling chess ai an ai? I must have missed it
>>108872317so it's just asking the max of same length lines segments connect a set of points. So just a double discrete optimization problem. Why wouldn't computers be better at this?
>>108869637These always end up being fake with 100% accuracy.
>>108874612This is the preferred approach to AI marketing. Find some niche where people don't care that much and don't invest time, then do something that sounds cool to a layman.The easiest example is the constant flood of local privilege escalations, "OMG X got cracked by AI" articles where it only applies when you're running a local .exe with some optional module installed. The sort of thing everyone knew existed but no one cared enough to look for. I guess obtuse math proofs are another good trick.You can assume they also spammed experiments and think tokens to obscene amounts and only reported successes, or even had knowledgeable people review and nudge it, massive amounts of $$$ are tied up in this shit so no one is gonna risk their fortune to play fair.
I won't believe for a second that mathematicians are luddites. Also, at first glance the solved problem looks like one that a mathematician made up as a kind of puzzle for other mathematicians, not like a real problem.
>>108878504It's just dabbing on us at this point
>>108878509>especially the circular motifs and hidden text ("ONLY SAILORS KNOW HOW TO LEAVE")what did it mean by this?
>>108876458I can finally truly communicate
>>108876648Exactly, mathematical tools are more difficult because they are more expressive, a retard gets a picture keyboard instead of a more expressive regular one because they can't use the regular one despite the many benefits they offer. You probably don't see the benefits of pure mathematics in the same way a retard doesn't see the benefits of using all those complicated tiny buttons to type individual letters. Though Im glad you finally get it.
>>108879316not sure if retarded or just pretending.jpg
>>108879329(You)
>>108876458Trying to deflect with "humor" I see. Well I saw it.Anyway, did it help you to avoid acknowledging what I said?
>>108879316I don't see what's so hard about>I WANT COME ON YOU>IN OUT IN OUT IN OUT IN OUT>GOOD DONEI think it expresses my mathematical intent
>>108870551If you want to really go down the conspiracy rabbit hole, what if they just hired some mathematicians and got them to solve the problem and then claim the AI did it?These companies have infinity dollars. They can afford to pay a fat sum to keep people quiet.
>>108870551>>108881151To be clear, that is kinda what they did. They hired a bunch of world-famous mathematicians and even as per their allegations, let the AI generate random mishmashes of existing math techniques that the mathematicians reviewed until one of them wasn't retarded. The non-retarded mishmash was then rewritten from scratch by the mathematicians.
>oh my musk the chatbot has hallucinated and the chatbot makers decided it said something valuable and accurate because it boosts their stock prices
