4 ms·
> we can however be optimistic, oddly. If you believe Feynman when he says that you can't explain to a child something you don't understand.. then we can see th
by eru 3mo ago
> we can however be optimistic, oddly. If you believe Feynman when he says that you can't explain to a child something you don't understand.. then we can see that ChatGPT has no idea of just what it has done!
Why would that be optimistic? Seems like the pessimistic reading to me, if anything. Or are you having a bout of Schadenfreude?
- oliculipolicula 3mo agoIt means that humans can, for now, still do something that chatgpt can't. Distill [proofs. Even if some may hesitate call that understanding.] Compare the various summaries that humans have written on the Jacobian counterexample, to the chat logs that were archived.
- eru 3mo agoHave you tried asking ChatGPT / Claude etc for a good summary?
- oliculipolicula 3mo agoYes. Have you? I'm not guessing that they aren't working on this aspect or that chatbots won't be able to do it in the futute. It just seems that we do have an advantage for now.