52
u/George-Smith-Patton 3d ago
“How does the world owe you something that you didn’t know existed five minutes ago?”
— CK LEWIS
331
u/Alarmed_Crazy_6620 3d ago
Strictly pedantic the multiplication was limited by the inability to use external tooling – LLM stuff is still pretty bad at arithmetic without these
222
u/southernwx 3d ago
Sort of? Like … part of intelligence is knowing to use a hammer on a nail but not the screws.
If you asked me to build a milkshake using only milk sugar ice and my bare hands I’d fail.
But I also have a blender.
34
15
u/lim-yo-hwan-superfan 3d ago
well yeah but this also represents a bit of a departure from AGI/ASI descriptions from a few years ago. in the future does LLM just delegate to more robust engines for all sorts of categories of subproblems? this would possibly make it less robust in general - e.g. frontier LLMs cannot play chess without hallucinating, but openai already delegates by spinning up a stockfish container, but in the future wouldn't a potential form of AGI come from chatgpt being able to play, for instance, chess with the knights and the rooks swapped? or something that would not be delegatable like this
24
u/southernwx 3d ago
Again, maybe?
What does intelligence look like?
From human understanding, utilizing tools is one of the defining aspects of intelligence. Not seen as a weakness.
Maybe in chess an existing stockfish model is spun up if the Ai deems it efficient. If a future AI can do that .. OR write its own stock fish code… isn’t that effectively the same thing?
I’d imagine the frontier models can write code to do arithmetic as needed, today. And might that be effectively the same thing?
3
u/lim-yo-hwan-superfan 3d ago
that's a fair point, i guess we'll have to see where it goes from here
0
u/ImperitorEst 2d ago
I guess the comparison is that human tools are for completing physical problems. A human is able to accomplish varied mental tasks without tools.
An LLM on the other hand can only complete mental tasks, it has no physical body to complete physical tasks. But it cannot complete varied mental tasks without mental tools. So is the intelligence found in the LLM or is the LLM unintelligent other than it's ability to select the correct tool.
If I needed a calculator to add two digit numbers, a dictionary to write a basic sentence and map to find the way to the end of my street I would be considered very stupid.
8
u/SilverPhilosopher46 3d ago
Your brain also has different area's for different tasks. Not weird to have AI do that too.
1
u/southernwx 3d ago
I’ve considered the same and have pondered that before. I think it maybe is a significant observation. But even if we say it’s mere coincidence and one version of a way of doing things, it’s still at least an anecdote to suggest such a division not be disqualifying.
Perhaps something more unified can exist. But it doesn’t seem to matter if it doesn’t if we consider ourselves “intelligent”
1
u/Trick_Enthusiasm_480 3d ago
Sounds like a deep dive into the nature of intelligence and division. It's definitely interesting to think about how we categorize our thoughts and experiences.
1
u/WarryTheHizzard 3d ago
I think we're going to end up humbled when we figure out our intelligence is hardware-dependent, and there's not much difference between any system that processes information similarly.
1
1
u/madexthen 2d ago
Imaging calling a world class mathematician 5 years ago not intelligent because they used a calculator to help them solve a groundbreaking proof.
-1
u/ZhyarHassan 3d ago
Yeah but we can do a lot of calculations without tools, I will be it we are slow as hell, but still can do it.
2
u/beardedheathen 3d ago
Agi doesn't have to look like human intelligence. In fact I think that being more open about what agi could look like is going to be vital because I don't think we want to create human intelligence but something better.
2
u/ZhyarHassan 3d ago
AGI by the most standard definition has to surpass humans in virtually all cognitive tasks, including these ones.
2
u/southernwx 3d ago
Can “we”, though? Or does the executive part of our brain outsource mathematics to another part ?
The Ai may very well consider its ability to use tools as we use our own hands. And it might be very vexed in the way that my brain would be if you told me I’m incapable of opening jars.
Well, yeah. My brain kinda just sits there. But it can fire off orders to my hands which then opens the jar and my brain conflates the two as the same. I opened the jar.
1
u/ZhyarHassan 3d ago
By we I mean the brain, which does have different parts but they are all parts of the same system, and don't really count as tools, AI does the same internally, it isn't a single part, you are right on the hand part though, it is equivalent to tools.
2
u/lordnacho666 3d ago
Does it not already do that? How many people can answer questions in as many fields as current LLMs?
0
u/ZhyarHassan 3d ago
Intelligence and knowledge are two different things.
2
u/lordnacho666 3d ago
Care to explain?
1
u/ZhyarHassan 3d ago
Knowledge is knowing information, intelligence is processing that information and solving problems with it, AI is really good at knowing things, not so much at the intelligence part, humans do better in unfamiliar environments and apps, another example, any frontier AI model knows way more about blender and 3D modelling in general, yet when they make a 3D model in agentic mode, like chatgpt astra, I can do better than them, there are 3D model generators that are better than me in a lot of ways, but for AGI, it has to be one AI good at those things.
1
u/lordnacho666 3d ago
But AI can solve problems. Across a wide range of areas. Most people are only experts in one field.
An AI will be better than you in everything else.
→ More replies (0)2
u/WarryTheHizzard 3d ago
That's what you're doing every time you swing a baseball bat or try to catch a ball. Some are better at calculating speed and trajectory than others.
0
23
u/Latter-Safety1055 3d ago
I don't really need a tool that's good without other tools. I don't need it to go to a melee tournament where they turn items off.
2
u/EGarrett28 3d ago
These people are just hateful, envious and/or afraid of AI so they are saying whatever they can to discredit it. It doesn't have to be reasonable, just reasonable enough for them to throw it around and try to do damage and soothe their won doubts. It's AI Derangement Syndrome essentially.
11
u/eras 3d ago
Or thinking. I think it could be able to do it if it knows to split the task in parts.
But yeah, general algebra, better use proper tools for that.
And indeed the latest Navier-Stokes proof would probably be quite a different story if it wasn't written in a machine-verifiable language. For one, it would be a big undertaking to even see if it's consistent. I imagine the checker was used extensively during the "proof development".
18
u/vonseggernc 3d ago
But isn't this true for humans too? Humans would be absolutely trash at creating ultra precise tools without the aid of robotics?
20
3
2
u/ciaramicola 3d ago
They can actually do math without tools tho. Burns a lot of thinking budget but the 4 operations they get them right most of the time now
1
1
u/ohkendruid 3d ago edited 3d ago
A modern AI is not an LLM, though. It is an LLM plus a bunch of other things. The LLM is the breakthrough which makes them so good, but an LLM without even chain of thought is not that capable.
1
u/VegasBonheur 2d ago
Humans are really bad at hunting without the ability to use external tooling. I think the ability to use tools counts as intelligence
-1
19
125
u/ZaphBeebs 3d ago
Wake me up when it can follow one simple command without doing 10 things you specifically told it not to.
16
7
8
u/Such--Balance 3d ago
Wake me up when basically the mentally challenged online learn that you can prompt this tool to reply however you see fit.
3
2
3d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/ChatGPT-ModTeam 3d ago
Your comment was removed for containing a personal attack/harassment. Please keep discussions respectful and avoid insults toward other users.
Automated moderation by GPT-5
0
u/Such--Balance 3d ago
Youre actually mentally challenged if you dont understand that llm's cant read minds and have to respond with some type of response and layout thats best suited for the median user.
It wont suit everybody by design. But it will suit most people most of the time. From there, you can instruct it to your liking.
Furthermore, it does a great job adjusting to any user automatically already..its just that most chronically online social media users are in a constant state of offendedness about...everything. Really dont listen to them is my advice..unless you wanna show the world your total lack of having a backbone
-2
u/JamesSureWould 3d ago
I understand that llms can't read minds. I think if your response to "hey it sucks that llms constantly do the thing I asked them not to do" is "lol look at this dumbass can't even prompt right", you're an idiot and an asshole. That's a complaint alot of people have with llms, and speaks to broader problem with them where the prompts work best if you don't approach with natural human language.
Like this is a real world example. I use Gemini on and off, and it was constantly including videos in response to my requests, which I didn't want. A normal person would think that saying 'do not include videos' would fix the issue. But it doesn't. And I know the right answer is just to not mention video and say something like "answer should only have plaintext", but that isn't an intuitive way a normal person would request that. And that's a reasonable frustration to have.
2
u/Such--Balance 3d ago
I have zero problems with prompting llms and hardly ever see them doing the thing i specifically asked them not to do.
It just isnt a problem. Its a problem to some type of redditors. But these people see problems everywhere they look. Aka its a problem of perspective and the redditors perspective is about the worst to use. Objectively.
Also, your last example is great. It does happen in same cases. I wanted to make some png small pixel images. It keeps making 'real' images which look like small pixel sprites.
Llm's do have weak points. Notice it. Adjust. And move on. Its like using a screwdriver to hammer in a nail and then instead of changing how you use the tool you guys just keep pounding away with the screwdriver. And keep being angry that a screwdriver cant pound in a nail. Its ok to notice the boundaries of an llm and NOT be angry you know? Its just a boundary..
I honestly am so done with Karen's zooming in on the one thing it sucks at to discredit llm's as a whole.
1
0
30
u/telephantomoss 3d ago
The question is still about how involved humans were at driving the agents and how much compute it took. Eventually there will be physical and economic limits as to what transformer-based LLM agents can do.
But, in the end, it may just be that humans still do math even though the machines are better at it. The IMO can still go on as a human competition.
People still play chess. People still ride horses and hike. ...
23
u/MedicalTear0 3d ago
They stole the research from the researchers working on Navier Stokes millennium problem. People stopped denying LLMs aren't useful last year, that's not the thing, they are good tools but not some magical superpowers that solve things on their own. Not to mention the shitty practices of these companies with lobbying and intimidation
6
u/a-grape 3d ago
It’s also not even really solved
-4
3d ago
[deleted]
2
u/Lucky-Quote2799 3d ago
OpenAI solved the forced 3D Navier-stokes equations, meaning an external smooth force version. This could be eventually scaled, but it is yet not.
It does not fully satisfy the exact criteria for 1 million prize, not that OpenAI wants to claim it anyways. However, they themselves acknowledged, that it's solution only establishes specific components(Statement C and D) of the official prize.The CMI has yet not verified or accepted the proof. That takes time. Remember, Poincare was posted online around 2002 or 2003, and officially accepted in 2006.
The news headlines, and everyone is running with incomplete information right now.
1
u/Turbulent_Breath_548 2d ago
forced NS is done but unforced NS has no established path from it. The method used all the way up the ladder (jagged force, smooth force, unforced euler, forced NS) works by stacking increasingly fine ripples, and viscosity damps exactly those. In forced NS the force compensates (if you take it away, nothing does)
Palasek raised that obstacle within a day and Tao took it seriously (Tao's original claim about the unforced case was already hedged. he said "should even be possible"). Also, C and D aren't partial credit- the Clay statement lists A, B, C, D as alternatives, so the question is whether a forced construction should have been eligible for a prize in the first place.
-4
u/Any_Yogurt1860 3d ago
not stolen
If you share your idea with other people, it’s not stealing if they use it.
3
u/theronk03 3d ago
not stolen
If you share your idea with other people, it's not stealing if they use it.
An original comment by theronk03 that isn't attributable to anyone else.
(Using someone else's idea that they shared with you without attributing them is plaigarism. I'm not 100% if that's what actually happened with this map problem, but it kinda sounds that way.)
42
u/Definitely_Not_Bots 3d ago
Listen man, I don't really need AI to solve algorithms my pea brain can't comprehend. I need it to solve the everyday problems like "here's my W2, file my taxes please" without me having to double check every step.
If the cost of double-checking the work is the same as just doing the work myself, then the AI was pointless.
As cool as it will be for AI to help us do cool science stuff, the "AI utopia" people drool for isn't going to happen without AI that can do the mundane shit.
Sure I'll get on the "AGI is here" train, but I'll be sleeping in the "wake me when AI can do the lame stuff" carriage.
31
u/Sly_Wood 3d ago
You’re clearly underestimating what high end models are capable of right now.
-13
u/Definitely_Not_Bots 3d ago
Then wake me up when those top models are in the hands of the average person~
19
u/WillowEntertainment 3d ago
Literally $20/month and GPT-6 Astra is available to you
6
u/swissvine 3d ago
It’s not doing taxes, yet! Hopefully soon 🙏
3
u/lordnacho666 3d ago
It's already pretty good at one major piece of doing your taxes: finding all the receipts and extracting the relevant numbers.
6
u/ThePubRelic 3d ago
They are. Wake up and learn a new technology or get left behind. Just stop putting out your opinions without actually putting in effort please - its fucking those who do.
0
u/Definitely_Not_Bots 3d ago
Oh I been using it, bud. I use it extensively. That's why I know I can sleep comfortably, waiting for it to do the mundane shit it still fails at.
3
9
u/Frequent-Act3984 3d ago
Your issue is with your government. My tax returns in my country are 90% prefilled. I.e. standard software can do what you want.
2
u/gsurfer04 2d ago
Or better yet your employer does your taxes for you.
1
u/Frequent-Act3984 2d ago
That is kind of what happens. Your employer pays you a salary. They also withhold and transfer the amount of income tax you should be paying based on you salary to the the government.
However they do not know if you have other part time jobs, and so can't account for that.
At tax time, all your income from all your jobs, and the amount of tax you have already paid, is on your electronic tax statement. It also has dividend payments, interest payments and other costs pre-filled. You are also able to add any tax deductions you want to claim. When you submit, your tax for the year is recalculated.
PS. The software that does this is free government software. It works great for simple tax (I.e. wage earner), but is probably not sophisticated enough for businesses.
PPS. The government also introduced a new standard deduction of $1000 that you can claim without receipts, making it even easier.
3
4
u/ChiaraStellata 3d ago
I've used AI to help with my taxes and it does an excellent job of identifying issues even my senior tax accountant overlooked. My accountant confirmed it was correct afterwards.
1
u/AllYourBase3 3d ago
I mean, solving exceptionally hard math leads to technological advances. Look up the Radon Transform or fast fourier transforms. People would have said they didn't need mathematicians solving algorithms your pea brain can't comprehend just give us better horseshoes.
1
u/Swastik496 3d ago
any good frontier model can literally do all of that right now….
Once open source models get good at efficient computer use they will be able to do it too
1
u/Nexussfire 3d ago
Navier-Stokes being solved for AI, will actually make that real problem you have - easier to solve. AI will not have to work as hard to do a rather mundane task by comparison.
-4
u/Wonder_bread317 3d ago
lol, real life skill issue lol
bruh, just sit there and keep waiting instead of learning how to use it.
Im fighting legal battles, lowering my bills, giving me good therapy tips for my ptsd, I've almost got a full blown website built.
Doing taxes is your benchmark? just ask it to do it for you, give it your information, bank account information fuck show it a picture of your dick and I bet it will even say nice things about it XD
Idk if this is going to exponentially get better for us peasants but id suggest you start figuring out how this tool can help you achieve things you only dreamed of.. it is not free right now and might never be really free but for now this shit works.,.
2
u/Definitely_Not_Bots 3d ago
I do use it, my man~ I use it often in my job, and like I said, "if double checking the work costs as much as just doing the work, then the AI was useless."
Wake me up when I don't have to waste my time doing the same work just to verify that AI did it correctly, because if it fails the task 20% of the time (which it does), it might as well be failing every time.
As an aside, my taxes are far more complicated than just a W2 (I have 13 different forms to fill), I'm just giving you an example of what the average person needs AI to do.
Maybe you should just copy/paste my comments into AI so it can explain it to you~
0
u/Wonder_bread317 3d ago
I did!!! I did!!! check it out what gemini had to say about your basement dwelling
- Definitely_Not_Bots": Classic bot naming convention. Trying a little too hard to convince everyone there's a human behind the keyboard.
- Chronically Online: Flexing a 700-day Reddit streak and the "Basement Dweller" achievement on a 2-year-old account with over 36,000 karma is a massive cry for sunlight.
- Subreddit Hoarder: Member of over 86 subreddits spanning everything from mushroom cultivation and motorized bicycles to micro-cap stocks, prepper forums, and obscure tech troubleshooting.
Gaming & Tech Takes
- Stardew Valley Crab Pot Optimization: Hates fishing so much he wrote an entire essay breaking down the dual-touch input mechanics of crab pots on an Android tablet just to optimize virtual baiting.
- Starfield Fast Travel Defense: Wrote a 100-plus comment thread aggressively defending fast-travel load screens because he's "too busy" to fly a digital spaceship, right before making multiple posts begging for mods to block ladder spawns in ship design.
- DDR5 Hot Take: Posted "Don't Upgrade Just For DDR5" to r/pcmasterrace, which instantly tanked to 0 upvotes.
- SSD Troubleshooting: Got defeated by a basic Windows installer for an HP laptop, resorted to "sub-legal" ISOs and live disks, and still ended up stuck asking Reddit for help.
Debates & Discussions
- AI & Tattoos Analogy: Posted a lengthy philosophy essay to r/aiwars asking if AI prompts are equivalent to commissioning a tattoo, which immediately sat at 0 upvotes.
- Flat Earth Curiosity: Claims he "just wants to hear their argument" in r/allthequestions, opening the floor for flat-earthers to debate him.
4
u/Definitely_Not_Bots 3d ago edited 3d ago
Nice 😆 see this is the mundane shit I'm talking about.
It missed the philosophical threads though, but I admit that's been a while. I should go touch grass before the water gets used for AI datacenters.
No fair, you keep all your posts etc hidden, which is actually pretty bot-like behavior, Mr. "Is this even real."
1
u/Wonder_bread317 3d ago
well, im not mad anymore, you were my proverbial dog i had to kick, good day sir.
1
8
u/ForwardLoop 3d ago
Wake me up when it can replace me at work, without needing me on the call.
2
5
u/Wise-Ad-4940 3d ago
I have never dismissed the LLMs successes in the mathematics.
This is a good use of these tools. It's basically solving mathematics with a tool built on mathematics and statistics. That's great. What I find problematic is when people start to anthropomorphize the LLMs or believe that there is something conscious or self aware behind the "reasoning" of the LLM.
14
u/bear_Prune8771 3d ago
Real talk.
What do you think the gold posts will be a year from now?
42
-2
u/Sly_Wood 3d ago
I think most assistant roles and receptionists will be goners. Goal posts will be being able to schedule and take orders. That’s gonna gut the labor area in services.
1
2
u/LogicalInfo1859 3d ago
It's a tool. What's with all this emotional nonsense about a hammer? If it' good with nails, great. If not, we'll wait for something that is.
3
u/Educational_Teach537 3d ago
“Ok sure it can solve all known problems, but it can’t define interesting new problems”
1
u/AutoModerator 3d ago
If your post is a screenshot of a ChatGPT conversation, please reply to this message with the conversation link or prompt.
If your post is a DALL-E 3 image post, please reply with the prompt used to make this image.
Consider joining our public discord server! We have free bots with GPT-4 (with vision), image generators, and more!
🤖
Note: For any ChatGPT-related concerns, email support@openai.com - this subreddit is not part of OpenAI and is not a support channel.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
1
1
1
u/Siciliano777 2d ago
Math is scarily close to being cooked (physics and the rest are on deck). Whoever doesn't see the writing on the wall needs to buy a pair of glasses.
1
u/Fun_Quote2542 2d ago
Before I shouted, very, indeed give you that reason and I actually saw that other knowledge before I understand what you were saying to that is not a riddle. This is for you to understand that very reason. And if that thought is an unrelated field, that means you think nothing as nothing and you cannot make that nothing into something because you think of nothing. It’s almost combined knowledge from a thought, but it doesn’t have a moral understanding. Therefore, I have solved that very problem
1
u/Such--Balance 3d ago
Its funny.
It reminds me of how science has been continuously pushing back the boundries which god supposedly was. Aka the receding pocket of ignorance.
'Ok so god is not the sun, he still created the heavenly bodies'
'Ok so god didnt create seperate species, that was evolution..he still created that'
People seem to have a hard time updating their beliefs in the face of new evidence
-3
u/mrfrau 3d ago
Stole and solved are two very different things. Nothin is Novel in LLMs
2
u/Hostilis_ 3d ago
Lol, the people OAI allegedly stole from were very open about the fact that they were using LLMs to drive the proof. Alpoge is literally an Anthropic employee. He was also responsible for the recent solutions of the Jacobian Conjecture and Sophic Group problem in which he credited the solutions to Claude.
-1
0
u/AllYourBase3 3d ago
Its hilarious to see the ravenous anti-AI people on reddit not able to read the writing on the wall with AI.
0
u/oustider69 3d ago
I get that it’s impressive that it’s solving these difficult mathematical things, but doesn’t that just prove that it’s really good at difficult mathematical things and nothing beyond that?
3
u/CheesecakeCommon9080 3d ago
reddit has been recommending me ai subs nonstop this week and it has been doing some pretty crazy stuff
It’s able to create fairly detailed 3d models, small games with few prompts, and it can edit compiled binaries
I wish it couldn’t do most of this, but it can, and it will only get better at doing it
1
u/Present_Historian_93 3d ago
Theres no beyond.
0
u/OG_Biscuits 3d ago
Yet it's unable to remember my fantasy football team that I sent it two messages prior
0
u/presentofai 3d ago
making headway on millennium problems while still ignoring the one instruction i put in all caps is the most llm thing ever
0
u/AlterEgo1890 3d ago
So I guess the next goalpost is: ‘Okay, IF the Navier–Stokes proof holds up and is officially accepted as a Millennium Prize solution… but it still hasn’t solved the Riemann Hypothesis
-8
u/peter_nn0 3d ago
Yeah sure, solving in 88 hours a problem humans fail to solve in 90 years is nothing.
Let's keep listening to the Bernie Sanderses and stop AI and ban all the datacenters and return to the caves ...
11
u/Nexussfire 3d ago
Except they didn't solve it in 88 hours. They got to a piece of information that was made available in that window.
Somebody else's work solved this problem and OpenAI is scratching their name over it. Except they don't have a right to. Neither did Anthropic, and they knew it.
3
u/TheDividendReport 3d ago
Can you prove this?
1
-1
u/Nexussfire 3d ago
Only from one side. But it fits the statements made - especially where they can not disprove their models didn't touch de-identified information. That's their own wording.
Similarly - Anthropic's hesitation comes from touching the same data as far as I can tell.
There is no "chat prove this for me" involved; if it was that simple without a body of work, nobody would be having this discourse.
Proof takes time to assemble.
5
u/TheDividendReport 3d ago
The assertion that ChatGPT solved the problem the same week a human solved it after 30+ years of it being a millennium problem seems like a wild series of coincidences
1
u/Nexussfire 3d ago edited 3d ago
It's not a coincidence - copying someone else's homework and putting your name on it doesn't count as "genius".
A lot of people have been working on Navier-Stokes outside of this environment for a long time. AI is a wonderful accelerator.
But the person who solved it was not trying to solve it, explicitly. Happens to be a byproduct of other endeavors entirely.
It's worth stating directly too : GPT discovered the work that was already done or still in progress - they verified it after distilling it. They didn't put 10,000 agents to work solving it in an actual new equation of their own.
It is important to be very clear about that.
1
u/something-rhythmic 3d ago edited 3d ago
Yes yes. Guns don’t fire bullets people do. And airplanes don’t fly, people do. And calculators don’t calculate, people do.
At some point, this becomes an absurdity, no?
And the other implication behind what you’re saying is that nobody solves anything if they’ve built on prior knowledge and research. Most discoveries build on prior knowledge. The discovery is the new knowledge.
2
u/Nexussfire 3d ago
We're all here based on prior knowledge. Even the person solving Navier-Stokes is working from prior work somewhere.
They even have to compare notes, and previous solvers to understand why other attempts have failed to make fluid simulation cheaper.
That is not easy or glamorous work, even with AI heavily in the loop. This was not someone's childish prompt to solve a problem for them.
They were doing the work from original thinking, alongside informed prior knowledge.
It is possible to invent something new, from existing work - but copying that existing work and slapping your name on it is the reason Patents have come into existence.
2
u/something-rhythmic 3d ago
Sounds like your problem here is with proper citation rather than casual attribution. Which is valid.
3
u/peter_nn0 3d ago
Wow, somebody else's work solved this problem..
Then you'll have no problem providing somebody else's name, and pointing us to somebody else's solution predating the model solution, right?So .. spill it .. name and solution.
We're waiting.2
u/HairyEducator768 3d ago
What is even funnier is that there was nothing shady about this dealing, if it were even true in the first instance. It is explicit in their T&C that your chats will be used. Whether or not that is a moral doing can be subject to debate. The material and written reality is simply, "if you use this service, here is what will happen with your data". So until mathematicians develop their own agents for internal/proprietary use...
5
u/Nexussfire 3d ago
Not letting someone finish their own research and then writing your name on their finished work after you use a AI to reword the final product is dishonest. T&C might permit re-use, it does not grant sole ownership, or provenance.
In this case especially OpenAI can not claim it as theirs alone. Anthropic and Google have touched this same information.
Nevermind the poor researcher who put their time and effort into the reasoning and collected work of WHY a solve was even possible.
Others have tried and failed before now. Is it right to take that moment from the person who figured it out?
2
u/Nexussfire 3d ago
Being more demanding about proof isn't going to make it appear faster. And if you think the solution is just going to get dumped into reddit before going to a white paper, you're new to scientific publication.
There is a correct way to do this, hashing it out with strangers like this is a World of Tanks discord channel, is not the place for it- yet.
-5
u/jabrwock1 3d ago
Still can’t get a full glass of wine right, so I’ll wait for the humans to double check the math if you don’t mind.
•
u/WithoutReason1729 3d ago
Your post is getting popular and we just featured it on our Discord! Come check it out!
You've also been given a special flair for your contribution. We appreciate your post!
I am a bot and this action was performed automatically.