131
OpenAI posts 700 maths preprints online: mathematicians are up in arms (www.nature.com)
submitted 1 day ago by to c/technology@lemmy.world
64 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

The research community is in uproar after OpenAI released a trove of more than 700 mathematical preprints entirely generated by AI on 6 October. The San Francisco, California-based maker of ChatGPT posted the preprints on the software repository Github.

Although some mathematicians celebrated the solution of longstanding problems, others took to social media to complain about being scooped. Some were incensed at what one physicist called a ‘slopocalypse’, even if the mathematical content could end up being formally correct.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 1 point 1 day ago* (last edited 7 hours ago) (2 children)

I’m actually paraphrasing Terence Tao and some of the top mathematicians on the planet. These discussions have been prevalent across the maths community.

It’s not common knowledge, but mathematical proofs aren’t intrinsically valuable (in any way whatsoever) outside of the mathematical community capable of deriving them. They are valuable because they create a mathematical community, not the other way around.

Scientific discoveries are different. Scientific insights without scientists are still useful to society. Not so mathematical proofs without mathematicians.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [+] -7 points 1 day ago (1 child)

    I’m actually paraphrasing Terence Tao

    That doesn't even mean you're saying the same thing bud...

    Non-mathematicians don’t realize this, but proofs aren’t intrinsically valuable outside of what they mean about the community capable of creating them.

    Do you think "non-mathematicians" think solving a math problem magically gets someone a check? Like, if anythi g you have it backwards

    You're way off on everything though.

    You should paraphrase less, wait till after you understand what you're reading.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 4 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

    I provided a link. Are you… not able to read?

    What do you think I mean by “valuable” and why would that equal “getting a check”?

    Fucking bizarre. This might be the dumbest conversation I’ve participated in this week.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent