4 ms·
> I can use AI for coding after decades of coding. I can't use it for theoretical physics because I can't evaluate the responses. That is what will happen thou
by vouaobrasil 3mo ago
> I can use AI for coding after decades of coding. I can't use it for theoretical physics because I can't evaluate the responses.
That is what will happen though to future generations: they won't be able to use it for anything because none of them will have the "decades of coding" experience that you have had the privelege to have without AI.
- singularity2001 3mo agoThey will have decades of experience with AI and they will be able to guide them by sniffing their hallucinations from single words.
- retrochameleon 3mo agoHopefully in decades hallucinations will be largely solved.
- timacles 3mo agoits just as likely hallucinations will only get worse because their source data will be riddled with hallucinations
- eru 3mo agoYou can't hallucinate a working lean proof.
- darkwater 3mo agoBut you can hallucinate everything else.
- tempfile 3mo agoYou absolutely can. How do you know your "working lean proof" actually proves the theorem you intended it to?
- lanstin 3mo agoOne of the concerns of the new LLM made lean proofs is ensuring they are using standard MathLib formulations in the theorem, so (quoting something in I longer recall the source of) a Grothendieck scheme is indeed what the reader and world know as a Grothendieck scheme.
- eru 3mo agoYou read the stated theorem?
- tempfile 3mo agoHallucinations are an essential feature of the technology, they cannot be "solved". You may as well hope that we solve the halting problem.