bwfan123

4 ms·

1.
by bwfan123 7d ago
> in which they themselves aren't quite able to validate whether the spell worked or not Knowledge is of 2 kinds: know-that and know-how. Know-that is what LLMs are enabling such as the proof here, while know-how is more useful as t
2.
by bwfan123 8d ago
> In either case I believe people who can put AI to the most value are the mathematicians themselves The net output of math will increase, and mathematicians have more work now to unravel all this, and make it useful. AI plays the role
3.
by bwfan123 8d ago
> When disagreeing with a human, it's very easy to view it as a competition The problem with AI is that it cant match human stupidity. It need some training on artificial stupidity to match its human counterparts. Humans on the othe
4.
by bwfan123 11d ago
> Understanding the concrete problem mathematicians are upset about can help us better understand the impact of AI on our own fields, imo, The author of this essay does not understand the concrete problem that mathematicians are upset ab
5.
by bwfan123 13d ago
> to pose existential risk to all of humanity The defense againt rogue-AI is very simple. Go to the nearest data-center with a fire-truck, and hose it down. So, I am in the least bit worried about this. Try this thought experiment: If s
6.
by bwfan123 14d ago
> the doomer marketing It is not doomer marketing - it is clever psy-ops magic trick. 1) Software is described in super-human terms when it is plain-old software. Was stockfish described like this ? no. 2) Datacenters become AI-factories
7.
by bwfan123 14d ago
> My second concern is the OpenAI-Hugging Face incident (OAI-HF), in which a swarm of agents essentially acted as a fanatically devoted collective Isnt this malware ? Whether it is fanatic or devoted or whatever the anthromorphic terms u
8.
by bwfan123 14d ago
> So this letter's message will fall on deaf ears AI companies are alienating the communities they serve. Instead of a win-win dynamic, they are keen on a win-lose proposition. You dont win trust by one-upping your customer. This is
9.
by bwfan123 14d ago
> and the equivalent of dropping a 200k line PR on people I can understand why the community is pissed. So now, lean proofs can be churned out at scale, and the community is left to decipher all of that slop into human understanding. The
10.
by bwfan123 15d ago
> Everything you say can and will be trained against you So, experts are incentivized to seed LLM data with false-leads to confound it. Already, garbage is being published on arxiv and elsewhere, and many sloppy code-repos too hastening
11.
by bwfan123 15d ago
> Younger folks may not get the chance This is the same problem for software engineers too. I am now asked: what can you do that AI cant ? The answer to this could be intangibles like taste, aesthetics, and insights which collectively fa
12.
by bwfan123 15d ago
> has lamented this practice as being unhelpful for mathematics A related point is that the actual solution approach is never revealed. What was the role of humans guiding the agents ? was it fully autonomous ? etc. It is in the incentiv
13.
by bwfan123 16d ago
there are also attempts to crowdsource human research directions - like the caltech mathathon challenge : https://mathathonchallenge.com these would help models on the same problems at the expense of the researchers. basically,
14.
by bwfan123 17d ago
> 10% chance AI "could kill all humans" Why not 10% chance that it will create enormous prosperity for all ? This is why the average person is increasing pissed at AI in general. That it gets associated with negativity.
15.
by bwfan123 17d ago
> but at the cost of sustaining the ecosystem John Naur said the same of coding eons ago [1]. That code is only as healthy as the human mental model of its maintainers. Code is not the artifact, it is the intuitions and insight and menta
16.
by bwfan123 17d ago
Same, very impressed with v4 flash. It has the right balance of cost and performance.
17.
by bwfan123 17d ago
More doomerism. Try to implement a deterministic workflow using agents with the latest models and no humans-in-the-loop, and you will realize what they are really capable of. There is too much unnecessary fear-mongering. All of this is only
18.
by bwfan123 17d ago
It is now clear to me why the AI labs are sponsoring these mathathons: https://mathathonchallenge.com/ . They are basically crowdsourcing human researcher data to get access to promising directions possibly later to scoop ot
19.
by bwfan123 18d ago
> The process is quite scientific This part is lost on many. The value of data is in the theories it confirms or more importantly disconfirms, and defining the trading edge is not easy after accounting for costs. I am wary of black-boxes
20.
by bwfan123 18d ago
In your final report of this experiment, can you also report the following: How many problems were NOT solved by AI in spite of attempts. What is missing in the debate of AI in math is that only the successful cases are reported. To get a b
21.
by bwfan123 19d ago
Pretend and extend. Wen rug pull ?
22.
by bwfan123 19d ago
> Nothing is that novel anymore, and solving day to day problems, more than requiring mental exhaustion, mostly require spending some time at them I felt this too recently and I linked it to excessive passive information grazing exacerb
23.
by bwfan123 19d ago
> Or the big labs trying to use professional mathematitians as (cheap?) Labour for validating LLM outputs? I am told AGI has been achieved. If so, shouldnt these systems be out and about on their own ? Looking at 1st proof submissions in
24.
by bwfan123 25d ago
> It just requires instructions to continue working until the spec is complete Try putting an LLM agent in a deterministic workflow without humans in the loop. My experience with this is not encouraging. Getting it to work requires sprin
25.
by bwfan123 27d ago
> I feel one need to also have developed the intuition by writing lots of code for reading to be really effective. This is one of the problems young engineers are going to face who rely excessively on AI to generate code. Their intuition
26.
by bwfan123 27d ago
> See how ridiculous that sounds? For most of us, writing code is the way to carve out intuition into an artifact. But, I have noticed some people are able to read deeply - and by that I mean, reverse the code to understand the intuition
27.
by bwfan123 28d ago
> Agents need to handle recurring tasks reliably and effectively This core problem remains unsolved. The solution presented in the article with Human In The Loop and some skill-magic such as "Write principles, not rules etc." i
28.
by bwfan123 29d ago
> Isn't this just a proof that there are many unnamed things, but no unnameable ones? Where is it a proof that there are many unnamed things ? I could only see it as an argument that there are no "unnameable" things.
29.
by bwfan123 29d ago
Names are like variables in a function. you can name variables anything you want from a human understanding point of view (final cause), but the compiler doesnt care about that. The compiler only cares about the efficient cause of that vari
30.
by bwfan123 1mo ago
> some of the statements seem like just straight up lies Why the angst ? I suspect this announcement punctured a lot of people's bubbles, and many are in disbelief and denial and hence the emotional reaction seen here. That a compan

More ›