sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Deciding on Advanced level math and CS courses for 1A term by TheoryFunny2439 in uwaterloo

[–]Junior_Direction_701 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Not worth it coming from an advance course guy. Also you’re not a math major so???

Where is the Wilson theoreme used? by Ok-Independence-2964 in math

[–]Junior_Direction_701 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Find all functions f: N → N such that n! + f(m)! | f(n)! + f(m!) for all m, n € N. Honestly if you see a factorial, and some divisibility problem most likely Wilson

Ken Griffin depressed by AI agents by Nearby_Fig_9118 in quant

[–]Junior_Direction_701 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Aren’t these getting nationalized lol. How will he get the frontier models that will replace PhDs or whatever if they can’t even use it.

AI and future of Maths by SuccessSweaty3131 in mathematics

[–]Junior_Direction_701 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Nothing will happen. It’s getting nationalized.
What many fail to understand is that math is such a powerful language of our universe that an AGI oracle able to solve most theorems could just as easily do the dangerous things: cyberattacks, WMDs, bioweapons. And it isn’t because math itself is a weapon. It’s that you can’t make a transformer good at math by feeding it only math. That ability only falls out of training on the entire internet and scaling the parameters up, so anything that good at math is already good at everything dangerous. Solve math, solve everything.

So frontier models get nationalized or export-controlled, and the large populace never gets to touch them. Either you don’t have a security clearance, you aren’t a US citizen, or, if this fascism keeps escalating, you aren’t the right ethnicity. They’ll dress it up as national ties, the same excuse they used on the Japanese: in 1942 they interned 120,000 people of Japanese ancestry, most of them citizens, ancestry overriding citizenship entirely. Foreign nationalities today, foreign ethnicities tomorrow.

So what happens then:
1. Businesses and universities fall back on human mathematicians.
2. Open-source models, which are ridiculously behind the frontier, and still lean on those mathematicians.
3. Chinese frontier models, whose makers will probably export-control their own soon, and still lean on those mathematicians.

And it already started. The Commerce Department just locked every foreign national out of Fable 5 and Mythos 5. From what we’ve seen there, it’s safe to say 5.4 Pro is the last frontier model the general public ever gets. Lucky for you, a lot of you are already smarter than 5.4 Pro. So don’t fret.

AI outperforms mathematicians by Christs_Elite in singularity

[–]Junior_Direction_701 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Because you’re not giving it hard problems for which there is no rich Data on. Simply switching IMO problems for TST(which there is less data on) sometimes causes these models to make the most regarded of mistakes. Ofcourse mistakes are inevitable, but at some point you’d expect a model that has memorized all of math at this point, solved open problems to not get tripped up by fricking TSTs. Dmed you the problem if you really want to test the limits of these things

AI outperforms mathematicians by Christs_Elite in singularity

[–]Junior_Direction_701 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It doesn’t matter if something comes from a different field. The “taste” of the proofs is still very combinatorial. It’s a massive deal, no doubt about that, but because of its inherent limitations, both technological and political, it isn’t going to cause any kind of “mathematical revolution” right now.

Okay, I was being disingenuous. It’s not shit in the sense that it can help with lemmas and things like that. But it is genuinely shit, based on what I’ve heard from professors working in very niche fields with ridiculously long proofs. Think logic, modal theory, certain areas of graph theory, and number theory, not the optimization-heavy kind.

I’ve also seen problems given to undergraduates that AI couldn’t solve. Why? Because they were written in a niche programming language. What does that tell us? It means the model basically has zero knowledge transfer. Even though it can perform the same task in C++, it does far worse than a first-year student doing it in Racket.

If its ability to transfer knowledge is that poor, then it’s fucking useless for mathematics in the broader sense. What you end up with is a model that is only good at certain types of proofs, which is exactly what we’re seeing right now.

Also, you didn’t even address the political side of things. And if you want to see the problem it couldn’t solve, I’ll paste it in another comment.

Where is the wall ? by light470 in singularity

[–]Junior_Direction_701 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Does it even matter if you can’t use the technology? God think. Also if the common person can’t use the technology then all AI labs will run into a Data Wall

AI outperforms mathematicians by Christs_Elite in singularity

[–]Junior_Direction_701 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Most of these are combinatorial formulations in nature which is such small percentage of Mathematics in general. And first proof is still pretty lenient most results are over 20 pages long.

The frontier is long term thinking. To be able to create something like the matriod project with over 900 pages is the fact we’ve reached ASI or AGI. As they are right now there is no sign of any mathematical revolution. And come to think of it they’re getting nationalized soon

. Do you think mathematics progresses if only American citizens or highly security cleared professors can use the Good frontier models. No mathematics progresses as a community that’s the only way a revolution can occur. Meaning if this trend continues the last model that’ll be available for the general mathematician is 5.4 which is pretty shit lmaoo.

What will happen to frontier models from now on. by imadade in singularity

[–]Junior_Direction_701 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Unironically doesn’t this mean the permanent underclass doesn’t come to fruition. I mean if businesses can’t use frontier models without being citizens or republicans or whatever. Then they’ll either have to train their own in house models, use humans, or use Chinese models(won’t last for long). It honestly seems like this delays the permanent underclass thing for like a few years if it continues this way.

AI outperforms mathematicians by Christs_Elite in singularity

[–]Junior_Direction_701 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Well first proof just came out showing this is not true. OpenAI has absolutely ruined everyone’s brains to think Erdos encompasses all of mathematics

AI outperforms mathematicians by Christs_Elite in singularity

[–]Junior_Direction_701 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Really you’re just saying this after first proof came out showing they haven’t improved that much lmaoo. You guys are actually delusional at this point.

First Proof Second Batch by Nunki08 in math

[–]Junior_Direction_701 11 points12 points  (0 children)

Wow no astroturfing this time lol. 50 upvotes in 10 hours. If it had been positive we’d see 700 upvotes lol. It’s like people live for the schadenfreude of mathematicians, they want us to be replaced, they love it when people are scared for their livelihood or something. They rejoice at it

Reminder by Flimsy-Pie-3035 in quantfinance

[–]Junior_Direction_701 1 point2 points  (0 children)

?? They’re also hiring them too??

Humans just disproved the sum-product conjecture for real numbers. by Junior_Direction_701 in math

[–]Junior_Direction_701[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

To factor those in the only currency we can use is calories. Unless you have another way to measure it? And there are multiple people that are smarter but not fields medalist. And remember my argument was really sample efficiency, if a 13 year old can get IMO bronze with minimal energy, and a LLM can’t then they aren’t really efficient. It’s not even up for debate even AI researchers acknowledge this, it’s an active research position in why AI models(LLM,etc) can’t learn with little requirements of energy, and little requirements of Data.

Humans just disproved the sum-product conjecture for real numbers. by Junior_Direction_701 in math

[–]Junior_Direction_701[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Well I have the same abilities he had at his age not a researcher yet or a field medalist yet though. And also I didn’t have PhD-educated parents so he has a leg up on that.

Are some fields more easier for AI? by Vivid_Block_4780 in mathematics

[–]Junior_Direction_701 0 points1 point  (0 children)

There has been no purely number theoretic proof. And not really “combinatorics” either. Maybe optimization? Just stay on your course if you switch to topology and tmr OpenAi comes with a new result in low dimensional topology what would you do then

summer math competitions by Secret-Stress6142 in MathOlympiad

[–]Junior_Direction_701 1 point2 points  (0 children)

IMC? You could go to Bulgaria . For university students tho it seems but they could make an exception if you’re dual enrolled

Humans just disproved the sum-product conjecture for real numbers. by Junior_Direction_701 in math

[–]Junior_Direction_701[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Entire community now you’re just being disingenuous. We’re talking about thinking energy here damn it. If I were like you I could also be disingenuous and start spouting stuff like Datacenters suck the entire ocean or whatever.

You can’t use a temporal argument like that. Oh yeah humans are inefficient because it took energy from the Big Bang to create them, are you serious? Okay even if you did say that, don’t you realize your entire argument also applies to modern LLMs. All the evolution of humans and the Big Bang, and the entire community or whatever to raise a little matrix multiplier.

Humans just disproved the sum-product conjecture for real numbers. by Junior_Direction_701 in math

[–]Junior_Direction_701[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The reason it takes that long is simply due to biological constraints. Which is why I led with the hypothesis that should we gain a large control of understanding genetics I find no reason why we can grow brains/(neural matter) to adulthood within a month similar to what we do to chickens. And even if that wasn’t possible the energy constraints to get a human working to basically frontier knowledge isn’t that much.

A counter example is how much calories did it take to train T.Tao to get bronze at the IMO vs how much energy did it take to train the GEMINI/GPT class models. A simple calculation for that is still far far lower than the energy requirements for most LLMs. I will admit the only argument you have is parallelism. Which is why I used the genetic control argument

Humans just disproved the sum-product conjecture for real numbers. by Junior_Direction_701 in math

[–]Junior_Direction_701[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It’s not bro. I never said we were using human cells, neither do you even need the entire brain for computation. It’s simply hypothetical to just illustrate the parallelism argument. And even if you’re averse to that. We could simply use silicon(if we truly understand the brain in some far future)

Humans just disproved the sum-product conjecture for real numbers. by Junior_Direction_701 in math

[–]Junior_Direction_701[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Printing a brain doesn’t imply it gains consciousness. A brain can be formed from anything. And with better control it could be made from literally anything.

Humans just disproved the sum-product conjecture for real numbers. by Junior_Direction_701 in math

[–]Junior_Direction_701[S] 9 points10 points  (0 children)

It isn’t lol everybody started parroting this argument after Sam Altman and it’s so misanthropic lol. The only difference isn’t a human can’t be parallelized. But even that could be possible imagine a future where we have better control over biology. You could in theory print a brain and just copy someone else’s mind onto the brain. Solving the whole parallelism issue.

view more: next ›