5 ms·

For some reason this sort of thing bothers a lot of people. I think it’s great that we have a new tool in the toolbelt.

WhyOhWhyQ 1y ago
Gowers wrote about AI in the late 90's. He predicted a short golden age where mathematicians would still be useful to the AI. We are in that golden age now, apparently. The AI will soon eclipse all humans in mathematics and the art form of mathematics will cease in its present form.
- johnisgood 1y ago
  Could you elaborate on your last sentence please?
  - WhyOhWhyQ 1y ago
    Go read Gowers' essay.
    - estimator7292 1y ago
      Form your own independent thoughts
      - WhyOhWhyQ 1y ago
        I was sharing Gowers' thoughts. You clearly don't know how to read. It's not surprising considering the intellectual quality of the average commenter here.
        johnisgood 1y ago
        I still have no idea what "eclipse all humans in mathematics" and "the art form of mathematics will cease in its present form" mean.
        nemetroid 11mo ago
        Did you read the essay?
      - tekbruh9000 11mo ago
        Egh this is pretty "use unalived not died". "Get out an English thesaurus and recreate Mona Lisa in different words." If you really want to be a cognitive maverick, you would encourage them to make up their own creole, syntax and semantics. Still, the result is describing the same shared stable bubble of spacetime! But it's a grander feat than merely swapping words with others of the same relative meaning. You totally missed the point of "put this in your own words" education. It was to make us aware we're just transpiling the same old ideas/semantics into different syntax. Sure, it provides a nice biochemical bump; but it's not breaking new ground.
    - deleted 11mo ago
      [deleted]
    - auggierose 11mo ago
      How about a link to it?
  - siva7 11mo ago
    Think of it like software development. That art form also deceased due to AI. Remember the famous painters and hackers essay? It's not more relevant.
- squigz 11mo ago
  Mathematics in its current form, you say? Like, for example, when we transitioned from doing things manually to using calculators/computers?
muldvarp 11mo ago
It's because I still need to earn a living and this technology threatens my ability to do so in the near future. It also significantly changes my current job to something I didn't sign up to.
- mettamage 11mo ago
  Well yea, but school also tried to educate us for the unforeseen future. Or at least my school system tried to (Netherlands). This didn’t fully come out of the blue. We have been told to expect the unexpected.
  - muldvarp 11mo ago
    > This didn’t fully come out of the blue. We have been told to expect the unexpected. It absolutely did. Five years ago people would have told you that white collar jobs where mostly un-automatable and software engineering was especially safe due to the complexity.
    - mettamage 11mo ago
      In a concrete sense, what actually happened came out of the blue. I fully agree with that. That's not what I mean. > We have been told to expect the unexpected. But this didn't. What happened is unexpected. And we've been told to expect that. I understand that that's very broad, but the older people teaching me had a sense of how fast technology was accelerating. They didn't have a tv back in the day. They knew that work would change fast and the demands of work would change fast. The way I've been taught at school, it's to actually be that wary and cautious. You need to pivot, switch and upskill fast again. What are humans better at than what AI isn't? So far, I've noticed it's being connected to other humans. So I'm currently at a job that pivots more towards that. I'm a data analyst + softwar engineer hybrid at the moment.
- Alex2037 11mo ago
  given that there had never been a technological advancement that was successfully halted to preserve the jobs it threatened to make obsolete, don't you see the futility of complaining about it? even if there was widespread opposition to AI - and no, there isn't - the capital would disregard it. no ragtag team of quirky rebels are going to blow up this multi-trillion dollar death star.
truculent 11mo ago
> For some reason > _brief_ but enjoyable era
- muldvarp 11mo ago
  It's not even that enjoyable to review AI slop all day. So it's a brief and unejoyable era before the long and miserable era.
turzmo 11mo ago
The problem with automation is that it can suck the soul out of a job and turn something fulfilling and productive (say, a job as a woodworker) into something much more productive but devoid of fulfillment (say, working a cog in a furniture factory). In the past this tradeoff probably was obvious: a farmer's individual fulfillment is less important than feeding a starving community. I'm not so sure this tradeoff is obvious now. Will the increased productivity justify the loss of meaning and fulfillment that comes from robbing most jobs of autonomy and dignity? Will we become humans that have literally everything we need except the ability for self-actualization?
- laterium 11mo ago
  Humans are risk averse and loss averse. You see the downsides and are fearful but can't yet see the upsides or underestimate them. Why not make the same argument for internet and computers? We would've been better off without them? If AI makes doctors more efficient would you have your child die to make the doctor's life more fulfilling?
  - turzmo 11mo ago
    To be honest, yes, given the relatively high standard of medical care that we have, I might choose to be in a world with no AI accepting the possibility that some things could have been improved.

Gowers wrote about AI in the late 90's. He predicted a short golden age where mathematicians would still be useful to the AI. We are in that golden age now, apparently. The AI will soon eclipse all humans in mathematics and the art form of mathematics will cease in its present form.

johnisgood 1y ago
Could you elaborate on your last sentence please?
- WhyOhWhyQ 1y ago
  Go read Gowers' essay.
  - estimator7292 1y ago
    Form your own independent thoughts
    - WhyOhWhyQ 1y ago
      I was sharing Gowers' thoughts. You clearly don't know how to read. It's not surprising considering the intellectual quality of the average commenter here.
      - johnisgood 1y ago
        I still have no idea what "eclipse all humans in mathematics" and "the art form of mathematics will cease in its present form" mean.
        nemetroid 11mo ago
        Did you read the essay?
    - tekbruh9000 11mo ago
      Egh this is pretty "use unalived not died". "Get out an English thesaurus and recreate Mona Lisa in different words." If you really want to be a cognitive maverick, you would encourage them to make up their own creole, syntax and semantics. Still, the result is describing the same shared stable bubble of spacetime! But it's a grander feat than merely swapping words with others of the same relative meaning. You totally missed the point of "put this in your own words" education. It was to make us aware we're just transpiling the same old ideas/semantics into different syntax. Sure, it provides a nice biochemical bump; but it's not breaking new ground.
  - deleted 11mo ago
    [deleted]
  - auggierose 11mo ago
    How about a link to it?
- siva7 11mo ago
  Think of it like software development. That art form also deceased due to AI. Remember the famous painters and hackers essay? It's not more relevant.
squigz 11mo ago
Mathematics in its current form, you say? Like, for example, when we transitioned from doing things manually to using calculators/computers?

muldvarp 11mo ago

It's because I still need to earn a living and this technology threatens my ability to do so in the near future. It also significantly changes my current job to something I didn't sign up to.

mettamage 11mo ago
Well yea, but school also tried to educate us for the unforeseen future. Or at least my school system tried to (Netherlands). This didn’t fully come out of the blue. We have been told to expect the unexpected.
- muldvarp 11mo ago
  > This didn’t fully come out of the blue. We have been told to expect the unexpected. It absolutely did. Five years ago people would have told you that white collar jobs where mostly un-automatable and software engineering was especially safe due to the complexity.
  - mettamage 11mo ago
    In a concrete sense, what actually happened came out of the blue. I fully agree with that. That's not what I mean. > We have been told to expect the unexpected. But this didn't. What happened is unexpected. And we've been told to expect that. I understand that that's very broad, but the older people teaching me had a sense of how fast technology was accelerating. They didn't have a tv back in the day. They knew that work would change fast and the demands of work would change fast. The way I've been taught at school, it's to actually be that wary and cautious. You need to pivot, switch and upskill fast again. What are humans better at than what AI isn't? So far, I've noticed it's being connected to other humans. So I'm currently at a job that pivots more towards that. I'm a data analyst + softwar engineer hybrid at the moment.
Alex2037 11mo ago
given that there had never been a technological advancement that was successfully halted to preserve the jobs it threatened to make obsolete, don't you see the futility of complaining about it? even if there was widespread opposition to AI - and no, there isn't - the capital would disregard it. no ragtag team of quirky rebels are going to blow up this multi-trillion dollar death star.

truculent 11mo ago

> For some reason > _brief_ but enjoyable era

muldvarp 11mo ago
It's not even that enjoyable to review AI slop all day. So it's a brief and unejoyable era before the long and miserable era.

turzmo 11mo ago

The problem with automation is that it can suck the soul out of a job and turn something fulfilling and productive (say, a job as a woodworker) into something much more productive but devoid of fulfillment (say, working a cog in a furniture factory). In the past this tradeoff probably was obvious: a farmer's individual fulfillment is less important than feeding a starving community. I'm not so sure this tradeoff is obvious now. Will the increased productivity justify the loss of meaning and fulfillment that comes from robbing most jobs of autonomy and dignity? Will we become humans that have literally everything we need except the ability for self-actualization?

laterium 11mo ago
Humans are risk averse and loss averse. You see the downsides and are fearful but can't yet see the upsides or underestimate them. Why not make the same argument for internet and computers? We would've been better off without them? If AI makes doctors more efficient would you have your child die to make the doctor's life more fulfilling?
- turzmo 11mo ago
  To be honest, yes, given the relatively high standard of medical care that we have, I might choose to be in a world with no AI accepting the possibility that some things could have been improved.