Record profit and margins. Just opened a massive office in Hyderabad. Offshoring? Corporate greed? Both?

What does this have to do with millennials?

What does “replacement of American” mean exactly?

I see an argument about the paper being poorly written, which I believe, but I don’t see how that relates to honest final paragraph about mathematicians being chefs or whatever.

It’s clear from the author’s tone about lean, emails, infographics, etc. that he thinks automating those away is fine. Why should math be any different?

Nobody came to him and forced him to read it, just like nobody is forcing you to read code I had chatgpt write.

If AI can solve such grand, outstanding math problems, and mathematicians argue these pure math problems are important, what’s the problem with them needing to read the output if they want to understand it?

Can't you read the article and understand how he kind is obligated to engage with it ?

The absolutely funny thing is, he is obligated precisely because the proof is very likely to be correct.

The alternative you are proposing implicitly is even crazier. OpenAI should not release a proof that is most likely correct so that it doesn’t burden others. What? It’s not about that guy dude. It’s about the society TM. One can’t delay progress because a guy may be burdened.

“Guys plz don’t release this thing that is absolutely correct but I’m kinda busy with other things ok?”

> The alternative you are proposing implicitly is even crazier. OpenAI should not release a proof that is most likely correct so that it doesn’t burden others.

The alternative is that they do the work to properly present the results. They spend billions of dollars in AI training and inference but can't afford to even cite the literature properly? They're doing the bare minimum because they're inly interested in doing a PR stunt.

they will do it. in a year, the same mathematicians will cry about (O)AI making their lives hard by not only solving more problems, but also presenting them with "enjoyable proofs". They'll still cry because the current excuse is a veil.

Bare minimum is still _solving_ the open problem standing there for years. Nobody owns math. Nobody owns giving enjoyable proofs to someone else.

If you don't like to engage with OAI proof dumbs in current state, don't. Maybe others will. Or maybe _these_ mathematicians are afraid that _other_ mathematicians will do it. Just elitism and gate keeping.

> but also presenting them with "enjoyable proofs". > Or maybe _these_ mathematicians are afraid that _other_ mathematicians will do it. Just elitism and gate keeping.

Ok, I don't see the point of discussing with you. It's clear that you decided what to believe in and no evidence will convince you that reality is more complex. The proof is that you ignored all the nuances expressed here by simply sticking to your simplistic interpretation, without any explanation of why such nuances are invalid.

You know what would be a great reaction from the so called "community" ?

Hey! It is really nice that you have dropped solution for so many open problems. We appreciate it and would like to see more. However, can you please work on the output writing/explanation quality? It is hard to read and understand. We would be happy to independently validate these but current paper quality leaves much to be desired.

That's it. This would make paper quality an important target for next generation models.

If problem was unreadable proofs, that would have been the reaction. But that's not what we are seeing :)

FWIW, in many online platforms, many actual mathematicians who referee papers, have said the quality of the papers are not outstanding, but they are still better than average.

It doesn't make sense to expect such a positive reaction from the community when OpenAI publishes these papers without proper citations, scoop mathematicians, and copy-paste publicly available preprints. These are points I raised above and you didn't address. It is obvious that the reaction is distrust: OpenAI spends millions in prompting and subsequent self-publicity, but proper citation is too expensive?

> FWIW, in many online platforms, many actual mathematicians who referee papers, have said the quality of the papers are not outstanding, but they are still better than average.

I don't know what "online mathematicians" you're talking about, but I'm a professional one, do reviews and discuss regularly with other mathematicians (some of them of high profile); no one thinks that these AI papers are above average in terms of writing. This is what even in the most well-known online platforms has been repeated over and over. It seems like you're biased on this one.

Whats the nuance here? Your post implied that the problem was unreadable proof and we are saying that this is not central to the discussion. Unreadable proofs are actually very very irrelevant to this whole drama

I think you’re out of touch with the discourse in the mathematical community, it’s quite relevant because clear communication is an important aspect of intelligence

Proofs can be unreadable for more than one reason. Are these ones unreadable because the math is super advanced or because current agents suck at clear writing? Maybe a bit of both?

Fine and we are saying that this is not central to the discussion because even if models wrote it nicely, there'd be even more outrage.

Do you disagree with this? For example, if openai had provided really readable proofs with utmost care but still dropped 400 at once, would there have been less outrage?

> Do you disagree with this?

Absolutely. If they cared about properly citing the bibliography, sharing how their models work, etc, it would be so much easier to make an assessment of the situation, of what will be math in the future, and all those deeper questions. What we got instead? from those 400 papers, there are already 4 that have been found to be a copy of recent publicly-available papers. They spend millions for "the good of science", but they can't afford basic scientific ethics?

> if openai had provided really readable proofs with utmost care but still dropped 400 at once, would there have been less outrage?

Less criticism, yes

There’s always going to be outraged people, but outrage isn’t the word I would choose to describe the positions of the mathematicians I’ve read on this topic, including TFA. There’s a lot of optimism mixed with frustration that something important is missing

Ok agree to disagree. I think readable proofs are smallest of problems and a distraction to a bigger problem which is loss of meaning.

“Everything costs money, but it shouldn’t with AI.” … “Below, for paying subscribers, I’ll explain…”

Not sure how this got to the front page (I have some uncharitable ideas), but I suppose low-to-mid quality writing/copy is the one thing that ai has sent to zero, so that’s convenient now!

Pick any subfield under the massive domain called “life sciences”.

Or do it as a hobby. I love shooting guns, I certainly wouldn’t shoot people if that was the only way to make a career shooting guns.

1. Those early discoveries were much closer to today’s applied mathematics (which many of the pure math academic types sneer at FWIW), and 2. They made those discoveries without public funding.

If AI can bring forth mathematical discoveries much faster than academics, wouldn’t it behove society to use AI? It seems the me the tradeoff here is the benefit of all vs the ego of a few. I empathize with the struggle many math PhDs must be going through, and maybe I don’t fully understand the tradeoff as they see it, but I’m not convinced by the letter written by a few career, tenured academics.

Yeah, Airbnb has been awful since 2022. Hotels always cheaper, easier, and better.

Airbnb is insanely expensive and I have to do everything myself.

The only reason to choose it is because it has some great venue that Booking is missing, but it's very rare.

The only time I ever used AirBnB the host cancelled on me 2 days before my trip while I was scrambling to find a replacement. Absolutely awful user experience that truly offers nothing to people in their moments of extreme need.

My mere fear of this happening keeps me away from the platform

Airbnb is so much more versatile I almost always start there when traveling. (And then move to booking.com.)

A house for 6 people. A guaranteed view. A real kitchen. A remote location. Etc.

You’re comparing traveling for 6 vs traveling for 1. I can’t imagine booking an airbnb for a work trip.

I’ve booked play airbnbs for eg surf trips with friends. “Guaranteed view/kitchen/remote location” is laughably inaccurate.

The last Airbnb I booked in NYC was literally a bed in a closet with bed bugs. I got my money back (should have received more for the inconvenience and dishonest listing, tbh).

All this is ignoring the egregious cleaning fee they tack on after providing detailed cleaning instructions they make you do anyways.

Somehow I don’t think people are confusing raw seismic station earthquake counts with the three back-to-back high profile/magnitude earthquakes that recently occurred in Venezuela, Colombia, and Indonesia.

I understand the point, maybe those recent earthquakes aren’t ood, but still.

There are also likely a lot of earthquakes we don't notice because they don't effect populated areas. There's a lot of ocean around the ring of fire.