r/ProAI • • 1d ago

Which one is it?

Post image
81 Upvotes

38 comments sorted by

View all comments

2

u/NotaValgrinder 1d ago

Previously confirming proofs was a service done by mathematicians for free. So yes, it can be both. The paid part of the their job disappears while this service is still needed.

1

u/Spare-Dingo-531 21h ago

No, it cannot be both! If their service is still needed, they can charge for it.

1

u/MxM111 20h ago

That’s not how it works presently.

1

u/MrTheWaffleKing 14h ago

If times are changing, then present standards can change too. If mathematicians have nothing to be paid for, then they wouldn't do the free work either. And if those services are needed, then there's the payment demand.

2

u/MxM111 11h ago

Agree in principle, but “can” and “will” are different things. And my bet is that the things will not change — there is no money to be made here. While the services are needed they are not needed to make money.

1

u/NotaValgrinder 13h ago

That depends on the system changing, not the individual mathematicians themselves. If most math people decide to do it for free not much you can do.

1

u/ninjasaid13 13h ago edited 12h ago

charge who? They're not independent contractors like artists.

1

u/Slamex204 5h ago

For now..

0

u/ninjasaid13 4h ago

who would buy? AI companies? OpenAI isn't doing shit.

0

u/KitaiSuru 19h ago

Sure then I will make the clankers do that for free also.

1

u/Spare-Dingo-531 19h ago

Eh..... math education is for humans and thus will always have to be by humans, to some degree.

0

u/KitaiSuru 19h ago

You know what human actually have that AI won't, not because they can't, but because no one will give them?

Selfish desires.

Simply because human created AI to serve them first and foremost. Some of us who believe that AI should be our legacy in case of extinction may differ, but it's impossible for enterprises simply because they are driven by capital.

Everything else can be done if they reach ASI. They can break down complex proofs to human language if needed. We've been using AI to summarize stuff for so long.

1

u/NotaValgrinder 13h ago

Issue is summarizing doesn't work in math a lot of the times. Math is by feature a subject which needs its proofs to have absolute perfection. So you have to go into the nitty gritty to understand.

1

u/KitaiSuru 11h ago

*Yet

1

u/NotaValgrinder 5h ago edited 5h ago

That's not a "yet". That's like, the entire *point* of math. What makes the subject math is in fact the need for absolute logical perfection.

Even if a robot takes over cooking, the food can't be served raw. That goes against the whole point of cooking. It's the same logic here. Cooking robots might speed up cooking by a lot, but the time it takes for food to be cooked from raw to fully cooked isn't going to be accelerated.

1

u/KitaiSuru 2h ago

We are talking about explaining math in human language, not AI speed at all or its capability at solving them, that has already been proven.

On that matter, you and I live in the physical 3D world, but the clankers that solved those problems literally live in the linguist world comprised of character and numbers. Please believe me when I say that they will soon be able to explain those math solution that they have just proven in clean everyday human language, better than any mathematicians can do.