4 ms·
I'd still call this fancy autocomplete. I imagine the jump from this, to "come up with an interesting new branch of math to explore", is a long way off.
by daxfohl 3y ago
I'd still call this fancy autocomplete. I imagine the jump from this, to "come up with an interesting new branch of math to explore", is a long way off.
- ak_111 3y agoI totally disagree. I think it is more likely we will have quantum chips running your iphone before this prize gets cashed (and I am a bit of a quantum computing sceptic). For comparison, even field medalists sometime struggle with getting gold medal in the time allocated or identify the trick needed in solving an IMO question. The difficulty difference between solving an IMO level 6 problem and solving an open math problem is much smaller than most imagine.
- killerstorm 3y agoBy that definition 99.99% people are also fancy autocomplete. How many people you know who came up with an interesting new branch of math?
- daxfohl 3y agoYeah I don't disagree with this. But such people do exist. My expectation is that IMO gold is a couple years off. But inventing new math and explaining why it's interesting and useful is much much farther away. I can't decide whether I hope I'm wrong or not.
- esafak 3y agoFancy autocomplete is made possible by understanding. Can you imagine correctly autocompleting a proof to a Millennium Prize problem any other way?