>3 years of super intelligence (formerly artificial intelligence)>still 0 progress with ToEyep it's not intelligent
>proved Navier-Stokes>not intelligentPick one
>>17065888>>proved Navier-StokesNot as far as any serious physicist or mathematician is concerned. Textbook case of real-life specification gaming.
>>17065888first of all it only “solved” navier-stokes by not solving any equation at all. it constructed a counter-example. and on top of that there is good evidence that it stole the counter-example from users who were stupid enough to trust OpenAI to not exploit their users.
>>17065895>it constructed a counter-exampleThat's not even the issue. It "solved" an easier sub-category of the problem, where instead of proving an intrinsic blowup, you prove a blowup by introducing an external force. The idea was that if you can solve the forced variant, you'll surely produce insights into the equations themselves and make significant progress towards solving the full problem. They didn't imagine a bot swarm's LACK of insight and understanding could be weaponized to find a "solution" that adheres to the technical requirements without being interpretable as fluid dynamics. It's literal specification gaming playing out in the wild.
>>17065914Mathematicians have already shown OpenAI's approach to be a dead end, as far as solving the full problem goes. It really is just AI slop.
>AI is bad because it's not intelligent>AI is bad because it's too intelligent
>>17065920>i have schizophrenia like all ai believers
>>17065886BasedNo improvement on any open physics problems at all for that matter
>>17065963truth nvke, completely ZERO physical achievements, it's all fake and gay problems that no one cares about like >>17065888
>>17065888Is just a search engine, see: >>17065895Mark my words, it will be contaminated with ads and become completely useless.
