3 ms·
Not a counterpoint per se, but I burned $50k recently on a much more modest math problem (result already known, just thought I had a sketch of a more interestin
by hansvm 23d ago
Not a counterpoint per se, but I burned $50k recently on a much more modest math problem (result already known, just thought I had a sketch of a more interesting proof), and the LLM thought it had proved it within those bounds but had instead subtly fucked up the Lean definition. Take from that what you will.
Not to mention, it's still very much up in the air whether the model derived the answer of its own accord or sniped the important details from the researchers it was spying on.
- deleted 22d ago[deleted]
- hollowcelery 22d agoBut the researchers also did their research using essentially the same models, so that isn’t a counterpoint to AI models being at the far frontier…
- deleted 22d ago[deleted]
- hansvm 22d ago> not a counterpoint >> isn't a counterpoint Where do we disagree?
- eulgro 22d agoHow can you afford to burn $50k on an already solved problem?
- hansvm 22d agoThose are two separate questions: > How can I afford? Mostly not my money, tech makes one fabulously wealthy, I care more about math than fast cars or whatever (even as a pizza driver you can afford a fancy car if that's your primary motive), etc. > Already solved That's a very interesting insight into mathematics. It's absolutely just as interesting to prove that certain proof techniques are or aren't possible as it is to actually prove the main result, sometimes moreso, especially if they have any chance of improving attacks at other problems.