Who is in the wrong here?
>>17051592
If you offer a group money and people in that group say "fuck you bitch I don't want it", it's perfectly rational and reasonable to take the money and walk. I'm sure some people in CalTech are getting fucked over because they wanted to participate but they'll have to take that up with their colleagues
mathematicians are panicking
>>17051592They should be working on solving medical problems like cancer and alzheimers and actual important stuff. Those prize problems aren't going to change the world, people just try them because they're hard and they can win a million dollars and get recognition etc
>>17051592>the mathematicians in question
>slop mathematicsKEK its like this but the curriculum itself is endless slop problems
>>17051592Why would you go to a hackathon when you've solved a millennium prize problem lmao
>>17051674To mog mathtrans
>>17051669You can just throw more compute in math problems until you hopefully find a Lean formalization.You obviously can't do that for medical problems since their validation requires doing a bunch of lengthy real world trials.
>>17051669They can't do that because in this scenario people exactly like those in the OP have the power to gatekeep AI away from clinical trials.
>>17051621good. nice way to show who they really are. instead of fully embracing AI and trying to solve real shit they're looking after their own egoistical interests, which is why you want them replaced.I do not want people keeping shit from developing just because it hurts their fucking egos.
>>17051592based, fight the power.
>>17052460the power will simply find the proofs and teabag the meatbagscaltech grads will have to work at In And Out Burger i guess
>>17051592Ironically what's the point? If you didn't contribute to the proof development significantly it's not your proof then. Prompting is trivial task. Are these undergrads thinking it will be their proof and improve their credit?
>>17052507This is invalid. Why does the AI have to be prompted at all? In fact, aside from stealing everybody's work, the prompt is the most important element.
>>17052518>stealing everybody's workMost of it is publicly available knowledge on the internet. You can say the same things as a regular academic. There may be a recent controversy, but it still will be done with avaliable information. The only downside, I think is that it doesn't provide any citations. It's hard to think of a more short sighted plan than "I'm going forego developing any skill in favour of typing what I want in a text box and waiting". That might seem like it will be worthwhile while we're in this phase where it is novel to see agentic solutions, but how long will that last? How long will the human on the end of the prompts need to be an expert? Agents and harnesses are getting more capable and more autonomous all the time. SWE is already reaching the point where the standard is for a one shot to kick off a multi-agent workflow with zero input from the user. With the focus on math it is inevitable that the same will follow (how are we thinking the 10,000 agent swarm used in NS was coordinated?).You can do what you want of course, but if your long term plan relies on the way we use LLMs to remain static indefinitely... maybe consider developing a plan B.
>>17052526My guess is a large swathe of things aren't stolen at all. Companies are spending millions buying up every shit book from the last five decades to train on, when the actual training of every single author is roughly the same. They are ingesting bad signals. And very few people ever read the shit books and certainly wont be reading it from a bot.There might be some publishing technicalities especially if verbatim document reconstruction is generalized. There is already a type of royalties solution for this sort of thing in larger broadcasting. Some fuckin clanker users some lines from your book here is your penny. I think grievances are most likely tied to masses understanding they are powerless with virtually no structural input. Even if they were to amass a voting block, which is quite unlikely, their only input becomes an ineffective bureaucratic stooge waddling into captured regulatory agencies and processes. The democratic cycle has ran its course. The inept bureaucrats only operate against their pocket books and the decline of the state is inevitable. Elected populists are incapable of getting anything done and seem willing to tow the unpopular line either way.
