3 ms·
I'm not sure what's getting lost in translation here. The answer is quite clear: math textbooks are valued based on their ability to help readers understand mat
by SpicyLemonZest 14d ago
I'm not sure what's getting lost in translation here. The answer is quite clear: math textbooks are valued based on their ability to help readers understand mathematical principles, not based on the number or complexity of problems that they contain solutions to. If an AI lab announced they've released a new calculus textbook with hundreds of new integrals a human has never found before, that wouldn't be terribly exciting, because we all understand that finding new integrals isn't that important and not the point of textbooks anyway.
- srcreigh 14d agoLLMs can help people understand mathematical principles too. The idea that when LLMs produce solutions, people won’t try to understand them and won’t learn from it, is obviously not true. Terry Tao himself spent time digesting and simplifying LLM proofs. So again we’re left to speculate what the actual problem is. Math understanding will increase with LLMs. Not just professional mathematicians but amateurs.
- SpicyLemonZest 13d agoAgain, we’re not left to speculate, they’re being quite clear. I think you’re struggling to understand what Tao and his cosignatories are saying because you’ve acquired a very specific kind of “AI-pilled” mindset from social media, where taking AI seriously implies accepting LLMs should be used at any time for any purpose. They’re saying in great detail that LLM solutions are unhelpful when presented in a particular way, but you can’t help but hear them saying that LLM solutions aren’t helpful at all, even as you rightly point out that this makes no sense and is inconsistent with their observed behavior.