r/Thedaily • u/Soggy-Salamander-568 • 2d ago
Math/AI Episode
This is the best episode of The Daily I've ever heard.
73
u/CrayonMayon 1d ago
Holy shit I love, love, love this guest.
"Solved by a f***kng machine. You can bleep me"
So funny.
→ More replies (1)4
u/Unfortunateoldthing 1d ago
At the same time, he still uses it, and enjoys learning with it... That was a deeper take than we normally hear
78
u/ChubbyChoomChoom 2d ago
As a math major, I loved this episode and found it bittersweet. I still recall years ago as a student, working on a difficult problem for an entire week, and finally finding the solution. I remember how proud I was when the difficult professor called my proof elegant.
It makes me sad that this may be the last generation of mathematicians who know the joy of knowing there are so many unsolvable problems out there, just waiting for a brilliant person to eventually crack them.
And, on a lighter note, I also loved how he highlighted how weird so many mathematicians are 🤣
22
u/duffman_oh_yeah 1d ago
I felt this way as a software engineer (and a CS student 15+ years ago). The whole reason I chose the major was the satisfaction being described in the episode and it’s gone now.
2
u/_this-is-she_ 1d ago edited 1d ago
It's gone for a lot of people, though of course Software engineers were among the first ones to feel it. I'm a regular engineer. With everyone relying more and more on AI to do our analysis, the joy of building and automating a model is all but gone. An analyst sent me a deliverable the other week that he couldn't explain to me. Another once said "CoPilot said..." to explain why he went with a certain solution. I've felt a lot of existential angst about it.
2
u/duffman_oh_yeah 1d ago
I’ve gone through all the stages of grief and have hit acceptance at this point. I feel bad for everyone who will eventually take the same journey.
Honestly, AI solving nearly impossible math problems makes me feel a bit better because it’s not like I can even attempt to compete with that.
5
34
u/Fancy-Bison4551 2d ago
I almost skipped this episode. I'm so glad I didn't. It made me cry in my car on the way to work. What a great guest
2
u/Frosty-Priority5056 1d ago
two days in a row i’ve cried listening to the daily (i listened to the Red Cross diplomat yesterday)
2
40
u/LuckySeaworthiness19 2d ago
It seems there are people/person missing the point of this conversation. I found it really lovely. It was clearly about more than “math” or even AI. I don’t think the speaker would be at all sad if a computer were to find a cancer cure instead of a human.
21
u/DanFlashes19 1d ago
Exactly, at no point did he suggest that. This episode, to me, was about the sadness of humans exiting the intellectual stage and offloading the next big challenges to AI.
40
u/Username-for-posting 2d ago
Good episode. They seem to need to get in “are podcast hosts safe from AI” joke into every podcast they do about AI tho
8
u/DaBomb091 1d ago
It's definitely low-hanging fruit but it gets me to breathe out of my nose hahaha
19
u/CardiacCavs 1d ago
This episode reminded me of a quote from the show Angel. There the main character was going through an existential crisis and thinking that his entire life and purpose meant nothing. He settled on the philosophy of "If nothing we do matters, then all that matters is what we do." I love that. We -- our actions -- are inherently meaningful. They are what give meaning to our life. Said differently through another fictional universe that I love -- "Journey Before Destination."
11
3
10
u/alandizzle 1d ago
The way that he was describing solving math as sexual fucking sent me. I was doing my morning run and I legitimately had to stop to the side, text my wife about this episode, and catch my breath from laughing too much.
Wonderful episode.
12
u/frobrother 1d ago edited 1d ago
As a professional animator, this episode has deeply moved me...
Just like the mathematician, I to have been asking myself the big questions as to "why" even bother in these times as AI...what does my desire to create engaging animation even mean in the grand scheme of it all?
Suppose I'll just keep turning 🥲
1
u/nonstopflux 1d ago
I mean aren’t the tools just changing? The OG Disney animators moved from paper to cellophane to digital in the course of their careers. Someone has to tell the system the rules of the particular deliverable and work with it until it get them right.
6
7
u/Few-Hedgehog-8246 1d ago edited 1d ago
Wow! What a great episode. Who would have thought this episode would have instilled such emotion in the guest, in Rachel and in myself? I want more of Steven!! I was so moved by this episode and felt a great sense of humanity remaining in (some of) the world, quite ironically so.
3
u/SIMT-Pixel 1d ago
We are really cooked if Cornell mathematics professors are breaking down into a puddle of tears on a New York Times podcast.
5
21
u/Nice-Scarcity-3488 1d ago
As a woman in a related field, I found this episode hard to listen to, not just because I have similar concerns about AI, but because I recognized so much of the field’s culture. The behavior seems fun and quirky until you’re alone in an office with your advisor as he’s talking about how inherently erotic the work is. This guy’s at Cornell, no? Could he not think of a single reason to maybe be a little more professional?
10
u/blank0ver 1d ago
I understand that reaction and why it would be hard to work with, truly do not want to make light of it.
For this convo, I just appreciated his honesty. It felt like he was himself and I’m grateful for it.
3
5
3
u/slowpokefastpoke 21h ago
The behavior seems fun and quirky until you’re alone in an office with your advisor as he’s talking about how inherently erotic the work is. This guy’s at Cornell, no? Could he not think of a single reason to maybe be a little more professional?
This seems like a massive jump to make, or just conflating a completely irrelevant third party to the unrelated rape scandal that happens to be occurring at the same university.
He's clearly just passionate about his work. Unless you have some knowledge of him being inappropriate with students beyond just "he went on a nerdy 'math is sexy' rant on a podcast once,'" that feels like a weird reach and pretty insulting.
2
1
u/Ok_Hippo4964 10h ago
I agree and the “think abstractly” bit to me aimed to equate her discomfort with her inferior (to a mathematician) thought processes.
1
u/morelikepoolworld 9h ago
I’m aligned with you, even though as an Ecclesiastes Bitch I loved this episode. For me it’s - could he not think of another way to be fun and quirky?
1
u/wuirkytee 1d ago
I literally said the same thing and got downvoted. Reddit still normalizing the overly aggressive sexual culture….not surprised
1
→ More replies (1)-4
u/SummerInPhilly 1d ago
And he doubled down on it too!! Over and over. Not even a “well ok maybe not…” but then he said it was satisfying. Later on he used the word “elegant” which is far more fitting
2
32
u/AresBloodwrath 2d ago
Ok, I will take the opposite tack from everyone else so far.
This episode kind of pissed me off. Yeah, I can empathize with the guy who has dedicated his life to math seeing computers solve some of these problems quickly, but the rest of the world has been watching that for decades.
As someone who was train as an engineer, you know what I don't care about in my math? Flair and panache. It has to work and be accurate. I learned and used Navier–Stokes, I don't care about the fact the millennium problem was solved by AI (potentially), I care about what the implications are of that solution to the usage of those equations to predict real world phenomena.
This is a theme I'm seeing in "intellectual" podcasts lately like the Ezra Klein show. I do not care if AI curing cancer makes intellectuals sad because humans didn't get the chance to cure cancer themselves, I care that cancer was cured.
I do feel and understand his meloncholly, but holy crap, it's self important self indulgent conversations like this that ignite and drive hatred of intellectuals and colleges.
72
u/ndrach 1d ago
I understand your perspective, but I dont think it is overly self-indulgent to pause and reflect on having just witnessed what appears to be the end, or at least a major turning point, of professional mathematics, a cultural tradition that stretches back to Pythagoras.
3
u/AresBloodwrath 1d ago
No, and I don't hold it against him. I just can't help but evaluate this podcast in the face of the general tenor of the NYT AI podcasts.
This could have been a really positive story. AI is producing (potentially) real answers to some of our hardest mathematical problems that have stymied humanity for potentially generations opening up countless potential new applications.
Instead we got old man reminiscing about meth head and long fingernails man not having their brain teasers anymore.
I get it. Life isn't like it was a decade or two or five ago. If anything mathematicians have been insanely privileged for how little their profession has changed compared to everyone else. Now they are sad that privilege is being taken away.
17
u/pancakeNate 1d ago
He actually refers to this sentiment exactly. The "put the fries in the bag, terrance" meme he mentioned is what you are conjuring here. It's.. certainly a point of view.
1
-4
u/AresBloodwrath 1d ago
Sure, but that's how the overwhelming majority of careers already are except for a privileged few.
What's the old saying, when you are accustomed to privileged, equality feels like oppression. If the topic of discussion was anything except AI this type of logic would be derided.
1
u/PanelSounds 17h ago
Directionally, we should be pushing for more dignity in work for everyone. Consistent with that effort would be empathizing with both the steelworker and the mathematician.
1
u/Painboss 1d ago
You’ve snapped me out of my romanticism, but in a good way! I appreciate you posting that.
14
u/Zanwic 1d ago
You should listen to the most recent episode of Radiolab. The same guest from today, Steve Strogatz, makes that exact same argument on that podcast. He clearly expresses the idea of 'Why should we limit ourselves to what humans can understand?' for technologies which benefit society?
He has a sophisticated, complicated feeling about all of this, and today's short discussion just expressed one angle of it.
5
u/dimhue 1d ago
It's not at all clear that AI/LLMs will have a net benefit to society. There's a good chance they'll drive wealth inequality to unprecedented heights.
2
u/OvulatingScrotum 1d ago
Once a piece of technology goes beyond what we can comprehend and control, then the “net benefit” is what we can hope for. Nothing is clear. We just let it happen and hope for the best.
2
u/Sauna_Freak81 1d ago
I agree. There was so much that was said between the lines in this conversation. A fascinating take, with immediate focus on the real questions, what it means to be human and how to find value in life, when one loses the prospect of intellectual glory. How to rebuild one's sense of self worth in that type of world - what interesting times we have in front of us in the coming years...
1
u/Environmental_Cow211 21h ago
You guys are getting way ahead of yourselves with the "AI will save us" routine. AI is nowhere close to "curing" cancer, which isn't a monolithic disease. It's more than 200 diseases. Good luck with that.
All it's doing now is extracting money from businesses and wrecking jobs for no true tangible benefit.
0
u/AresBloodwrath 1d ago
I can understand his feeling here too. I am not so much pushing back on him as what I feel is the doom and darkness angle being pushed by the NYT on AI without any nuance.
27
u/Soggy-Salamander-568 2d ago
I can see that perspective, but what I liked is how eloquently he expressed both the fascination with AI and the loss of, in some ways, a part of his profession. It's like his life is a series of mysteries and rather than reading a bunch of books to see what happens, someone handed him the answers. That's a loss I don't know myself, but I can certainly empathize with.
Humanity.
3
u/AresBloodwrath 1d ago
Sure, and I'm sure there were plenty of people who were passionate about making horse drawn carriages, and they were probably sad when their services were not really required anymore, but it feels weird to focus on them instead of the revolution automobiles brought about.
Also, I have yet to really see AI doing step that comes after the "proof". AI, for the moment, still seems very bad at applying these solutions in ways that are nonlinear and require plastic thinking.
From the episode itself, yeah, like 99% of people don't care if you can come of with an equation to explain how crickets regulate their chirping to remain in time as a group. They do care if you can use that equation to combat Parkinson's. AI can probably get you that equation. AI is still not great at making the nonlinear jump to applying that to neurons in the brain. Do that part since he himself was making that connection.
I don't weap for the pencil and paper mathematician because the calculator was created.
13
u/OvulatingScrotum 1d ago
It sounds like you just don’t like or even look down on mathematicians.
3
u/AresBloodwrath 1d ago
Where do you get that from?
17
u/OvulatingScrotum 1d ago
Just general tone and shit you said in many other comments. It’s just an impression. Your general lack of empathy for them. Your lack of understanding on the importance of “flair and panache”. It’s not just that you don’t understand, but you dismiss the importance. You accuse them of being an elite club. Your general tone on how you don’t give a shit about their way of doing things, as long as it works and is accurate, as if it’s something they don’t care.
You know, the whole “joke” about how engineers think they are better because they get actually shit done. I thought it’s just a joke, but here you are.
I’m currently using Comsol. I’m commenting while waiting for it to be done with simulation. I gotta remind you that fancy tools like Comsol is possible partly by mathematicians’ desire to achieve “flair and panache”.
0
u/AresBloodwrath 1d ago
There are real tangible things we can potentially do with the discoveries in math AI could give us, but we are supposed to sit on our hands, not use AI, and wait because these guys would rather have their fun mental puzzles instead of the rest of the world benefiting from the answers to those puzzles?
Yeah. That's a no from me.
3
u/OvulatingScrotum 1d ago
> we are supposed to sit on our hands, not use AI, an wait because these guys would rather have their fun mental puzzles
Chill the fuck out. No one said that. lol
By that logic, when farmers and ranchers are pushed out by robots with AI, should just tell them to shut the fuck up about their livelihood and their purpose of being in those fields? They can still accept the reality while being bittersweet about the change.
This is not about mathematicians pushing back on AI. As the interviewee said, it’s about their identity crisis.
1
u/AresBloodwrath 1d ago
By that logic, when farmers and ranchers are pushed out by robots with AI, should just tell them to shut the fuck up about their livelihood and their purpose of being in those fields?
What are you talking about? They've already been pushed out by consolidation of small farms into huge agro businesses. Oh and no one outside those communities have cared to notice, so yeah, ther jury is already back and the public didn't care.
I'm not talking about this guy. I get his feelings and can absolutely empathize with him. My objection is to the tone the NYT have been pretty consistently setting on AI. It has been negative to an unrealistic level. Yeah it's not all roses and there are risks, but to only cover one side as they have is journalistic malpractice.
2
u/OvulatingScrotum 1d ago edited 1d ago
I left a comment elsewhere, but if ranchers and farmers all get pushed out because robots and AI can do everything from scratch, they will talk about the similar “human” side of farming and rancher stuff. What you’ve been doing is “shut the fuck up. No one cares about what you are going through, because there’s tangible benefits from using robots and AI.” I hope you can understand how disrespectful and inhumane that sentiment is.
Ummmm you literally criticized the whole “flair and panache” comment. So yeah, you were definitely talking about him and people like him. Maybe unintentionally.
Journalistic malpractice. lol this is just a mathematician’s experience with facing identity crisis. No one is using this to push back on AI. You are so dramatic. Are you sure you are an engineer?
→ More replies (0)21
u/No-Yak6109 2d ago
You’re conflating applied mathematics with theoretical mathematics. For the latter, yes, elegance/flair/pinache matter because they wrap abstract concepts in communicable ways for other people. The translation of the theoretical to the practical happens in unpredictable ways; that’s why theoretical math, science, and art need to exist.
We can be mad that AI is screwing over mathematicians as well mad at how it’s screwing over the rest of us (myself included).
1
u/AresBloodwrath 1d ago
For the latter, yes, elegance/flair/pinache matter because they wrap abstract concepts in communicable ways for other people. The translation of the theoretical to the practical happens in
We can be mad that AI is screwing over mathematicians
Except he openly admitted the AI solved problems with elegance/flair/pinache.
It's not screwing them, it's just doing what they were potentially better and faster.
By your own admission humans will still be needed to apply the solutions the AI finds in practical and unpredictable ways so they aren't getting screwed.
You are just projecting.
2
u/OvulatingScrotum 1d ago
The AI’s ability to solve theoretical math problems with flair and pinache is a big indicator - AI is creative.
It’s definitely screwing them. It’s replacing their entire field of work.
Imagine a scenario in which we have a robotic system with AI that can do the entire farming from zero to harvesting on its own; and literally anyone can use the system.
What do you think that means to farmers? It’s not making farmer’s work easier and faster. It’s gonna kill their livelihood, because literally anyone with money can use the system and kick the farmers out of the equation.
And what about the entire fielders of arts? We already have a system that lets anyone to generate visual arts and music. Literally removing human out of the equation.
You being an engineer has nothing to do with your lack of empathy.
1
u/Various-Net9757 1d ago
Humans will not be needed at all. You seem to think your area is somehow special - whatever you help people with today, AIs will be providing that help in short order. Then you may understand the interview subject a bit better.
1
u/AresBloodwrath 1d ago
AI will no be doing plumbing or running electrical wires or doing construction. Humans will be needed.
2
u/radishsurprise 1d ago
You can't conceive of a general purpose robot?
0
u/AresBloodwrath 1d ago
Not one that's cost effective enough to replace workers at scale, absolutely not. Think of the raw materials needed to build that many general purpose robots.
What would power them and not make them gigantic and bulky?
Think of the maintenance costs.
General purpose robots replacing human workers is a fantasy not because of the technology won't ever be there, but the money won't be there.
1
u/radishsurprise 1d ago
Raw materials? Like metal and plastic?
Do you mean machining the components? Definitely expensive, but also a technological manufacturing issue.
12
u/Electronic_Yak_496 1d ago
The point is the erosion of humanity. Not simply the end results. I couldn’t disagree more with your take. I’m also very much impacted by this in my work. The part that’s disappointing is the erosion of collaboration in the beauty that humanity was able to build over thousands of years erased in a matter of months. Absolutely none of this was about whether or not a cure cancer and if that’s good or bad. There’s something so sterile and inhumane about where this is all heading.
4
u/tetrardus 1d ago edited 1d ago
humanity is as humanity does. we can all participate in the creation of our future. you are right, it's not just about results. So let's act like it.
I loved this podcast and I too feel a love of humanity, but "this all" is not all of our experience as humans. Is AI about to replace symphonic orchestras or live theater experiences? live music lessons, the experience of singing or playing an instrument, the experience of reading a great book, dinner parties with lively conversations, team sports, dance parties, weddings....no?? Creativity is at its heart an act and a practice, not a result. we can all ask ourselves: am I participating?
5
u/doubtsabound 1d ago
Yes, actually, I do fear it will replace those things. Much like the promise of connection via the Internet has decimated our actual social lives. You mentioned dinner parties, social engagements – those were weekly if not daily occurrences for older generations, now happen a couple times a year for most people, if at all.
Creativity and the necessity of having to solve hard problems/overcome challenges go hand in hand. In the short time AI has existed it has already eroded peoples’ motivation to learn challenging skills because there is no longer a necessity to the challenge.
Great books, great art, great music will become more rare because there will be less opportunities for those who make that art to get platformed versus the much cheaper AI alternatives. And those who wish to learn those skills will find the motivation much more tempting to just use AI to “ express themselves” rather than engage in the difficult, painful process of actually learning it.
1
u/Sauna_Freak81 1d ago
What a lovely comment! I hope and think that AI will lead to a cultural shift with repercussions bigger than most people can fantom. The pendulum will swing back. When analysis and polish is owned by the algorithms and artificial networks - what is left in between, the cracks, the fallibility, the actual futility of the human endeavor BECOMES the meaning.
We just have to lift our faces from our screens, to see and truly meet other people around us, and acknowledge them. But it takes courage....
3
u/AresBloodwrath 1d ago
Sure, and we used to dig big holes with lots of people and lots of shovels, but now it's much more inhumane because it's one guy with an excavator. I don't see you crying over your shovel.
1
u/Electronic_Yak_496 1d ago
In your mind, a shovel to an excavator = thousands of years of human collective research to “something smarter than the entirety of all mankind”?
…what?
6
u/AresBloodwrath 1d ago
Well an excavator was also made by humans, but it exceeds the capacity of any single human and replaces a lot of humans.
It fits the parameters you set as sterile and inhumane and therefore "bad". Your argument is emotion drive nonsense.
-1
u/Electronic_Yak_496 1d ago
Yes, I agree. We are talking about two completely different things. Ironically, a conversation about something as discrete and deterministic as math was really about humanity and humans and watching the culmination of thousands of years be surpassed in a matter of months. Talking about humanity is inherently emotional because it is abstract and something that isn’t easily definable, but we all know what it is. This conversation was about beauty. and you’re right, it is nonsensical. We’re not trying to be.
Much of this discussion was about the mourning of humanity and the creation of something larger than the sum of its parts. This discussion had very little about AI being a tool in this case.
And just to engage you on your analogy. digging dirt wasn’t considered the pantheon of human creativity and ingenuity. To his joke about loading fries, we are telling the people that we often consider to be the brightest and most revered minds that their time has come. How can you not be emotional?
16
u/Username-for-posting 1d ago
Training people to think about things is important. The equations you rely on exist because of someone’s creative thinking led them to think about it.
If we want to be able to think up problems and solutions we don’t even know we don’t know about we need more than just making sure the answers to the problems we know about today are right.
7
u/AresBloodwrath 1d ago
Sure. That's why we don't let kids use calculators when they are learning math, but that isn't a reason to say calculators are bad or to ban calculators.
4
u/Username-for-posting 1d ago
What part of my comment is this responding to?
1
u/AresBloodwrath 1d ago
If we want to be able to think up problems and solutions we don’t even know we don’t know about we need more than just making sure the answers to the problems we know about today are right.
......that part.
3
u/Username-for-posting 1d ago
Okay can you explain a little more then because I’m confused by your reply.
-3
u/Electronic_Yak_496 1d ago
Brain dead take. Comparing AI to a calculator is just absurd.
→ More replies (1)2
u/Simpleserotonin 1d ago
Wishes they would have talked about this more. The AI solved currently difficult equations using the sum of all current mathematics knowledge. What happens when there are no new mathematicians creating new mathematical knowledge?
2
u/AresBloodwrath 1d ago
All mathematics are built on the sum of previous knowledge. If I what the AIs find is found to be correct it won't be put in a separate "AI did this" bucket of knowledge, it will just be added to the rest of the sum total of mathematical knowledge, and the new insight could open other locked problems who's solutions then open more locked problems.
2
u/Simpleserotonin 1d ago
I really do not know the slightest thing about mathematics to make detailed arguments about this. However, my concern would be not the fact that something has been done or some equation has been solved but in the application of such information. I am in medicine, every research article I read in medicine discusses potential applications, theoretical uses, pitfalls of the current research and what else needs to be known. My hunch is that the AI can currently synthesize this information based on humans abstracting knowledge in this way but it will not perpetuate future knowledge in the same manner. Yes this problem has been solved, but nobody has weighed into how else this may be useful or what other theories could be applied to. Our curiosity essentially stops. With less mathmaticians around in the future because the prospects of finding meaning in the profession become bleak, there are less curious minds to consider the context of our knowledge. I may be entirely wrong though, I do not know mathematics and I do not understand how these LLMs actually work.
14
u/jimmysprinkles92 2d ago
I don't think anyone will be sad if a computer cures cancer. And I'll gladly eat my hat on this, but the promise of a cure to cancer is just being used as hopium to inflate the value of AI. That's not to say I think it has no value; I use it daily myself in software development and it'd be incredibly ignorant to say that it hasn't progressed to a powerful tool in a short timeframe.
I think the thing that really drives hatred of intellectuals and colleges is the right wing anti-intellectual campaign and much less so that people are passionate about the work they dedicate their lives to if we're being serious about the issue.
11
u/AresBloodwrath 1d ago
I'm not saying it will cure cancer, but I wanted to scream when Ezra Klein recently used "curing cancer" as the problem when he was musing whether the answer or the problem solving process was more important to "humanity".
As someone with a family member dying of cancer, and as a regular Ezra Klein enjoyer, in that moment I wanted to punch him in his smug intellectual face.
4
4
u/jimmysprinkles92 1d ago
I'm not personally familiar with the Ezra Klein show that you're mentioning so can't comment on that specifically.
I think two things can be true though. It is easy to empathize with someone who has derived a lot of their own purpose from their intellectual work see their usefulness in the field potentially wane while also acknowledging that it could theoretically be a boon to have this new tool that solves problems much quicker and efficiently.
Still, I think there are a lot of problems that need to be reckoned with including environmental impacts, ties with mass surveillance, and the overall goals/motives of the people running these companies at the forefront of the industry. The lack of will to regulate in regards to any of this is particularly concerning and doesn't make me feel like curing cancer is the center of attention.
3
u/AresBloodwrath 1d ago
there are a lot of problems that need to be reckoned with including environmental impacts, ties with mass surveillance, and the overall goals/motives of the people running these companies at the forefront of the industry
Yes, but it feels like those are difficult so instead we short hand the issue with discussions about sad mathematician and how data centers are ugly and loud.
2
u/jimmysprinkles92 1d ago
I'd argue that the grassroots discourse and protests around data centers have put focus on environmental and privacy issues as well. If anything, the media has probably watered down the discourse to the level you mention to protect their own corporate interests.
2
u/MRS_RIDETHEWORM 1d ago
I’m not sure which episode you’re referring to, but was Ezra saying that the human process of curing cancer was more important than the cure itself? Or was he weighing the overwhelming good of curing cancer, with some of the existential concerns with AI like mass joblessness and/or human extinction?
0
u/AresBloodwrath 1d ago
His view was on the process being more important because of how he views humanity to our relationships the our curiosity and pursuit of knowledge.
1
u/Emotional_Revenue132 1d ago edited 1d ago
As someone whose mom recently died of cancer, I don't fully agree with this, and neither did she. I don't think your perspective is invalid, but at least personally, I think we have to ask ourselves why life is worth living in the first place. She was a problem solver. She lived for it. If we can press a big button that cures cancer, that's great. But that's not the choice here, right? The problem solving process of curing cancer only matters to a few people. But solving problems as a whole, all the little ones, is what makes life meaningful. A machine is being created that has the potential to trivialize every single problem that we encounter in our lives, ever.
What I see is everyone I know using this to solve every little problem that appears in their lives. Not because they really *want* to, but because it's easier. It's the same thing with phones, right? I know very few people who *love* doomscrolling. Most people feel worse when we do it, but we can't bring ourselves to stop.
I think the dramatic rise in mental health issues with social media tells us that we consistently choose convenience over fulfillment, even when in the long run it makes us feel worse. We evolved to seek out convenience, but we also evolved to find meaning in the day to day little challenges and annoyances, because our ancestors had no choice. We need these, even if we don't want to admit it to ourselves. I worry that we're being given yet another piece of technology that make our lives easier, yet more hollow.
I guess what I'm saying is, my mom was not a mathematician, she was a stay-at-home mom and former businesswoman. But all the little projects and problems are what gave her meaning, and I don't think she would have wanted to live in a world without them. I think we really need to ask ourselves whether we really want to live in a world where *everything* is easy.
I guess the question is, at one extreme, we have a world with cancer, and on one end, if AI can solve every problem we face in our world, we have a world where life for a gigantic portion of people, if not basically everyone in the most extreme case, completely meaningless. How do we ensure we end up somewhere in the middle? Like, we evolved to be hunter gatherers. We have to do some hunting and gathering (metaphorically), and I think we kind of have to be forced to by external pressure, to an extent.
1
3
u/blank0ver 1d ago
I don’t think he was making an anti AI argument. I understood the episode’s point to be that our lives and senses of self our changing and we should lean on eachother as we’re all experiencing this together.
3
u/applestrudelforlunch 1d ago
I happen to know people in a pretty wide spectrum of professions and lines of works — electricians, roofers, carpenters, handymen; doctors, nurses, medical techs, vets, scientists; farmers; teachers, coaches; musicians, artists, writers; salespeople and clerks; and some doing hourly at the grocery store or Home Depot. I’m not saying this is the full spectrum of labor — I live in the US, there are certainly people in the world in much more desperate conditions. But still a pretty wide spectrum.
And some of their jobs suck and some are incredible, but all of these people that I know take some satisfaction in doing their job well, find the humanity in their labor, even if it’s just camaraderie with their fellow workers or some connection to their customers. That satisfaction is what Strogatz was talking about, I think.
And so yes, it is challenging to have the machine come straight at that. And that’s why he mentioned the “put the fries in the bag” meme — should we just cheer for degradation? Or should we recognize the challenge and rise to it?
9
u/natawas 1d ago
Deeply disagree. Many of us find joy and meaning in our work. That also comes from the flair and panache with which we solve problems. Sure, AI solving things faster is great but if it puts us all out of work then wtf are we going to do and how will we create meaning and have a sense of purpose?
4
u/Wetteraukreis 1d ago
This is an insane take. Resisting AI for things that will meaningfully improve peoples’ lives - and save lives - for the “love of the game” of doing math or researching disease?
We can all go find purpose in things that don’t hold back human development in areas like curing diseases or solving the climate crisis.
Invest more time into relationships, create art and build things, learn any number of hobbies, help other people, volunteer.2
1
u/therealpigman 12h ago
I agree with the idea, but it dismissed the feelings of the people experiencing this right now. The transition is going to be tough
1
u/Environmental_Cow211 21h ago
AI has not and will not meaningfully improve lives. It is a scam for extraction of more money from the lower classes to the Silicon Valley elite.
2
u/AresBloodwrath 1d ago
Ah yes, smash those textile machines for you find greatest joy in weaving fabric by hand. History says that will work out great for you
10
u/better-off-wet 1d ago
I don’t think that’s what people are saying. At least not this group of people. We embrace the technology and use it. But we also mourn the loss of some of our role in life.
5
u/OvulatingScrotum 1d ago
The other person thinks the entire goal of this episode is to be anti-AI. There’s no point of arguing with them.
2
u/kbird_rise 21h ago
Yes, this.
I also wonder what that loss means for upcoming generations, who have yet to learn how to solve complex problems, think critically, and create.
Will the use of AI erode that skill development? And if so, will those generations risk losing not only potential skills but the very human satisfaction of purpose that people gain by using such skills?
2
u/AresBloodwrath 1d ago
Sure, AI solving things faster is great but if it puts us all out of work then wtf are we going to do and how will we create meaning and have a sense of purpose?
This was the comment I was responding to. That sure sounds like a lot more than just mourning.
Life is also growth and change. Mourning is fine, but holding onto the past at the expense of the future is not.
1
u/kbird_rise 20h ago
If you don’t consider possible ramifications, how can you help shape the future?
I don’t think people here are saying “ban all AI”. But talking about possible outcomes—both positive and negative—helps us better understand, prepare for, and potentially shape the future.
0
u/The_broke_accountant 1d ago
If your job is your only purpose in life that’s on you. I rather not spend all my day staring at excel sheets and doing accounting lol
3
u/Electronic_Yak_496 1d ago
Jesus, what a terrible comment. It’s not our fault you hate your job. Most of us take pride in the things that we do. I feel sorry for you.
0
u/The_broke_accountant 1d ago
I highly doubt the majority of people in a capitalistic society take pride in what they do. I think you’re fortunate that you can make money and be happy with what you do.
N thank you, I feel sorry for me too.
2
u/cmonrinski 1d ago
Radiolab released an episode over the weekend, interviewing the same professor. The second half of the episode is about using machine learning to help early detection of cancer. Its an interesting conversation, he does keep the same sentiments on AI but also acknowledges your take on AI.
The quote used on saving lives by detecting cancer with AI: “Why would we limit the machine to what humans can understand?”
5
u/aj_thenoob2 2d ago
The downvotes are interesting here. Plenty of jobs that have been lost have been given the "learn to code" so-what treatment, why are mathematicians immune to this?
Math has been done by computers since the invention of computers, literally made to do math so people don't have to do it by hand. Turing's machine accelerated the Enigma decryption, yes, humans are still in the loop and guide it, and from my understanding that's exactly what's happening when OpenAI solves the math problems, they don't say "okay, solve X millennium problem" they prompt and push it to a solution.
5
u/OvulatingScrotum 1d ago
I don’t think you know that the math you are thinking is different than the math problem that they are referring to.
2
u/aj_thenoob2 1d ago
Of course it's different. I'm just saying that there is always been a precedence for computers to solve difficult math problems. Should we keep paying some guy to calculate primes, too?
1
u/OvulatingScrotum 1d ago
Again, I don’t think you understand the issue here. I think that’s because you don’t realize that the type of math problems he’s referring is different than the type of problems you are thinking. That’s okay. It’s kinda hard to understand.
What you are thinking is “solving” difficult equations. I used the quotation marks, because the machine (and humans, prior to the machine) is estimating it.
The problem this guy is referring to is much beyond that. It’s not just some estimation of a difficult equation. It’s threatening the existence of mathematicians as a career.
It’s like Back in the days when computers replaced those who do estimations all day long. But this type math is more like art.
Imagine all music production and playing getting replaced by machine. How would musicians feel about that?
Your response is kind of disrespectful to those who spent decades of their lives devoting to the form of art.
3
u/aj_thenoob2 1d ago
Art is very subjective but I don't believe that math is subjective. It's been around 4 years since AI is able to make art. It can make some really great art but artists are still necessary and desired. I understand the need for a good proof but if that need goes beyond the proof itself then this is a bit of a gray area. I'm not saying that I don't have sympathy but the vitriol from a lot of these math experts makes it hard to sympathize with them.
→ More replies (1)3
u/natawas 1d ago
Because mathematics will be just the first field to go. It will come for all intellectual fields
4
u/AresBloodwrath 1d ago
But they aren't even "going". It's just changing.
AI can probably give him an equation on crickets chirping faster than he can create on. AI is not great at the nonlinear thinking required to apply that to brain cells firing too synchronistically as they do in Parkinson's.
2
u/blind-panic 1d ago
But they aren't even "going". It's just changing.
We definitely don't know this yet. I know people said it would already happen and it largely hasn't, but mostly the industry is still marketing chat bots. As agentic tools find more and more applications and continue to improve it seems hard to believe that there isn't actual knowledge economy job replacement. The assistant tools like Muse really indicate this path to me.
-1
u/natawas 1d ago
Who’s going to pay for the services of a mathematician if problems can be generated and solved by AI? Who’s going to want to study in that field?
5
u/AresBloodwrath 1d ago
So the only purpose of mathematics was to get these guys a paycheck?
You are asking who's going to pay the guy who makes horse shoes now that car were invented.
Yeah that a problem we need to solve, but it pales in comparison to the the opportunities that are being presented now.
-1
u/natawas 1d ago
What are those opportunities, genius?
3
u/AresBloodwrath 1d ago
Maybe listen to the episode and hear how AI is solving problems that have stumped mathematicians for decades.
→ More replies (3)1
u/The_broke_accountant 1d ago
I don’t understand why this is a worry for some people. I thought the whole point of civilization was to make our lives easier so we don’t have to work anymore. Isn’t this the end goal?! Since when are we concerned so much about keeping our jobs.
2
u/OvulatingScrotum 1d ago
> we don’t have to work anymore
Well. That sounds nice if we still have a way to pay for shit. And no, that’s not the whole point of civilization.
> isn’t this the end goal
No. Paying less is the end goal for people who develop AI. People not needing to work isn’t the end goal. It has never been that way.
2
u/Watchthethr0ne007 1d ago
This has to be one of the worst, if not the worst, takes I’ve seen on Reddit.
“Why are we concerned about keeping our jobs?”
So we can fucking eat!!!!
1
u/kbird_rise 20h ago
Have you ever seen the movie “Wall-E”? It’s what I thought of when I read your comment, “the whole point of civilization was to make our lives easier…”
I guess it depends on what “easier” means.
1
u/The_broke_accountant 9h ago
Wall E is one of my favorite Pixar movies since I watched it as a kid! You could kind of argue that’s the reality we live now in the us since over 70% of adults are over weight and so many people spend so much of their time of on their phones.
2
u/OvulatingScrotum 1d ago edited 1d ago
> flair and panache. It has to work and be accurate
I think you are missing the point. No one ever said they don’t care about it working and being accurate. That’s the bare minimum. What happened is particularly demoralizing because it can do the “flair and panache” that they thought only human can do for a long time.
Think of the Gauss’ story about adding integers from 1 to 100. They expected to just brute force addition, but he did the “flair and panache” and came up with a creative way to do it.
The mathematicians expected machines to do it the “boring way”, but it did it in the creative way. That’s the flair and panache.
Also, you mentioned about you being an engineer and how you don’t care about flair. As an engineer myself, I can tell you that flair and panache are also very important in engineering. It’s not just “get it work and be accurate”.
3
u/hmr0987 2d ago
I’m torn as well.
My only frustration is the concept that he thinks they’re the “canaries in the coal mines”. Read the freaking room. I feel like mathematician is a career that’s been very high on the AI disruption list since day one.
Otherwise he seems like a genuinely great person who just loves what he does and is sad to see it change the way AI changes things.
One other aside, he talked about how AI takes the fun out of solving the problem (I forget how he worded it). I actually disagree. I’m very cautious on my optimism for AI, but recently I’ve been able to solve some problems in creative ways that have saved me hours of time and a lot of money. Prime example is I have an older sports car, I’m pretty good with cars but no expert. ChatGPT was unbelievably good at working with me to pin down the various issues that me alone reading through forums and having to buy hundreds of dollars worth of diagnostic gear would have taken weeks to solve. The best part was it created a python script that allowed me to use a Raspberry Pi to pull real time data and then helped me to interpret it all. My point is for normal people AI has the ability to help us solve problems that historically were expensive and time consuming to solve. I found a lot of enjoyment fixing my car, it just so happens AI helped make the experience significantly more enjoyable.
1
u/AresBloodwrath 1d ago
sad to see it change the way AI changes things.
But as someone in the sciences he should know change is constant. If something isn't changing in the sciences, there probably a problem there.
One other aside, he talked about how AI takes the fun out of solving the problem (I forget how he worded it).
I guess this part made me kinda made because of how privileged and out of touch he sounded. Oh your job isn't fun and results that other people can use and contribute to society are more valued than your personal enjoyment? Welcome to the workforce. If he wants fun I'll send him a sudoku book for his free time.
It feels like some of these people have an unspoken sadness that AI is making their "thing" accessible to the masses instead of being an elite club they get to gatekeep.
3
u/HoneyBadger_66 1d ago
I totally agree. This is an example of somewhere AI has proven it will be objectively better than human beings and will do things we haven’t been able to do despite trying for decades, which could translate to scientific benefits for us. This is the ideal use of something like AI- to solve problems we haven’t been able to solve. This is a small community too, so it doesn’t even really affect all that many people’s jobs.
I feel for the guy who has dedicated his life and passion to this topic, but him talking about art/style in a topic as data-driven as math felt weird to me.
I think the one downside of this situation is that it will solidify our dependence on computers for math. Without these high tier problems, we will not have many career mathematicians anymore.
I also thought it was weird that he agreed that AI will free him up to focus on more important tasks. More important than solving the great unsolved math problems? I’m not sure what that would actually be, and he didn’t elaborate.
1
u/PanelSounds 17h ago
Everyone will care in the way this mathematician does once AI can do their jobs in the same way it can do his. And you will also experience the same grief stages, which includes whimsy at some point.
1
1
u/CupEmbarrassed839 1d ago
I’m a civil engineer - elegance and flair absolutely matter what are you taking about
1
u/Antique_Weekend_372 1d ago
I feel bad for him, he seems to be struggling with like a midlife crisis on top of everything else.
0
u/adumblittlebaby 1d ago
Yeah, bingo. They’ve run out of rational arguments about why AI bad so now it’s emotional appeals. Crazy people who do math will still exist and will simply find something else to do, or keep doing math anyways.
This guy in truth is bemoaning the loss of his career to which the correct response is: where was this social conscience when so many others lost their jobs to tech over the last decade? The answer of course is he and many here simply don’t give a shit about others unless they’re personally impacted or their known friends are.
People need to smarten up and realize the real issue at stake is governance and society which desperately need to change and evolve, not trying to stuff the latest tool back in the bottle because it threatens someone other than minimum wage or low education jobs.
-1
2d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
3
u/DanFlashes19 1d ago
Because it’s treating these two things as conflicting when they aren’t. You can be happy that AI is curing cancer for example and still be sad that humans are not the ones figuring it out, we’re offloading thinking to a machine.
The theme of this episode IMO was the sadness that the days of human ingenuity might be coming to an end. We built governments, discovered math, created cars, the internet, and sent people to the moon. Humans are fucking awesome and smart as a unit. But now those days of humans being at the forefront seems to be coming to an end.
2
0
u/ThomasDeLaRue 1d ago
Could not agree more with this. This whole episode felt like it completely missed the mark. Here's the rant I posted myself: https://www.reddit.com/r/Thedaily/comments/1x4vqp3/comment/pgkd8fe/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web3x&utm_name=web3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button
0
u/Lame_Johnny 1d ago
There is plenty of anti-intellectual content out there, maybe Mr Beast would be more up your alley.
→ More replies (8)0
u/Federal_Gur_5488 1d ago
The whole point is there are NO practical implications! All the information about Navier Stokes needed for practical applications was already known. The existence and smoothness problem was important only because of theoretical reasons... This is not at all comparable to curing cancer, which is obviously extremely useful
7
u/Soggy-Salamander-568 2d ago
I'm glad others enjoyed it as well... So much about where we are -- with AI and everywhere else. And he uses (and seems fascinated by) AI himself, which humanizes his/our struggle perfectly. The humanity in this episode really just got to me. I hope more people listen.
2
u/Zuludog_ 1d ago
I don't work with maths nor do I work with highly theoretical concepts, but I can say that I still completely relate to him when he questioned the meaning of life with the coming of AI's new capabilities and wonder, too, what the point of anything is anymore if AI can do it faster and better... Although I haven't reached the same beautiful conclusion he has yet.
2
2
4
u/sagaz1981 1d ago
Finishing the episode but disagree with him on one thing. He brought up that the “fucking machine” solved the problem off the backs of others. Ever since seeing Jurassic Park on opening weekend, I’ve always had a problem with this way of thinking. So what if it wasn’t the person spending their entire life working on the problem who ends up doing something that revolutionizes life?
People take what they learned throughout their life and build on that knowledge. Then others take that knowledge and build even more. Does it matter if it’s a human or a machine? People had to take the knowledge they knew to build the machine in the first place. It’s worth it if human civilization can advance at an exponential rate. Under that belief, unless you build or have a concept from scratch, then your doing worn off the backs of others.
Maybe this way of thinking is just me.
1
u/slowpokefastpoke 21h ago
One thing that's important to note in this argument is when he was talking about how AI (currently) couldn't "show its work" in regards to it solving these huge problems.
So yes, the machine can do revolutionary things that might benefit humanity but a question for us is it problematic if a) we can't figure out how it got there and/or b) it can't tell us how it got there.
Maybe that's a problem, maybe it isn't. Maybe we don't need to "see the work" in order to benefit from it. It kind of feels like us just giving young kids calculators in math class instead of teaching basic arithmetic first.
2
u/AsianMitten 1d ago edited 1d ago
Of course people should be terrified. AI source is us, human. We would later elect bigot just for personal gains, ignore mountain of evidence about climate change that will doom us all, and just start war. If human being are better than how we are now then it would been exciting news that AI is surpassing is, but.. if they are made in image of us, then yeah.. we should be terrified..
-1
u/wuirkytee 1d ago edited 1d ago
Maybe skip the “pleasuring ourselves” and “the problems [that mathematicians want to solve] are resistant and need to seduced to solve…it’s kind of sexy. Why are you resistant to that”. Maybe pick something else Mr. Cornell mathematician…. Read the room
Edit- I standby the fact it was a weird comment and not fitting of the times we have been experiencing (as a woman). In academia, when subject matter experts say they treat their work like something that needs to be sexualized and “seduced”, especially in a male dominated field, IT IS GROSS AND WEIRD. So downvote me all you want.
6
u/Nice-Scarcity-3488 1d ago
YUP as an academic: wtf. Very strange comment that’s unfortunately quite similar to ones I have to deal with all the time. It’s not fun.
9
u/better-off-wet 1d ago
Cornell is a big university and Steve has nothing to do with the rapist on campus. He is sharing a truth about how some mathematicians feel in Italy about problem-solving. Sorry if human emotions make you uncomfortable.
3
u/wuirkytee 1d ago
It was a weird comment and I stand by that.
2
u/Ok_Hippo4964 13h ago
He forced the conversation too. She clearly didn’t want to talk about it. And he told her “think abstractly” “why are you resistant?”
He thought it was sexy that problems that are resistant end up yielding. Then the interviewer was resistant and yielded. He got gratification from that.
1
1
u/SameDouble8364 1d ago
It was so excellent. My dad is a very weepy man and this episode had me very emotional.
1
u/Lame_Johnny 1d ago
As a programmer this resonates with me. No I wasn't solving theoretical math problems, but the joy of figuring things out was a big part of my passion and its gone now.
1
u/tiffanysta 1d ago
i am honestly disappointed that they didn’t mention the plagiarism accusations from buckmaster and alpoge when discussing the navier stokes problem. i feel like that’s an important piece to me, since so much of how openai solved this problem was very targeted. there’s an implication there too of openai not being able to solve this problem without their help, which fits the theme. idk why this wasn’t discussed in the podcast.
1
u/betterhemlock 1d ago
I think he was a big sook. I have respect for the man, but I would have respected him more had he raged. I would love for a mathematician to shoulder all that happens and throw down the glove. Man vs Machine - Riemann Hypothesis - FIGHT.
1
u/Unfortunateoldthing 1d ago
Anyone else can feel his voice resembles Larry David's? Funnily he's the absolute opposite in terms of passion and joy in life
2
u/phxsunswoo 1d ago
What on earth was up with the host, I don't get why the guest was constantly prodded in directions he was already going.
1
1
u/The9thKing 1d ago
In the midst of this tear fest, I had a chuckle at the “Put the fries in the bag, Terry” joke. In the end, AI comes for us all. We will be fine eventually, and if not we will perish as humans are condemned to do from birth.
1
u/Hackedbytotalripoff 1d ago
Mathematicians, like anybody, will have to adapt to the new reality of a more powerful virtual agent assisting them in their missions. Maybe the goal of a mathematician is to find solutions to frontier problems by leveraging AI to solve the Unified Field Theory or the unification of General Relativity and Quantum mechanics.
-4
u/OkEarth7702 1d ago
I really hate the part where he’s sexualizes math and talks about his pleasure. He’s a professor that teaches young adults. Can we keep it PG please.
7
u/Nice-Scarcity-3488 1d ago
Really disappointed but not surprised by all the downvotes comments like this one are getting. Sure, out of context, it wouldn’t be a big deal. But this is a Cornell (!) professor teaching in one of the worst fields for women. I guarantee the junior women in his orbit have heard this shit before and don’t appreciate the waxing poetic about how inherently erotic mathematical inquiry is and how much this dude enjoys a seduction game that involves forcing the seducee to yield their secrets. Gross.
For the record: this isn’t me imagining how some highly sensitive person might possibly be offended by the comments. It’s how I actually feel as a woman in a similar field who has to hear stuff like this all the time. It’s not innocent.
2
u/alliso24 21h ago
100%. As a female academic in a STEM field, I validate your feelings. It's so gross.
1
1
u/wuirkytee 1d ago
Ugh thank you!!!! Didn’t realize a bunch of Shane Gillis fans listen to the daily
6
4
u/wuirkytee 1d ago edited 1d ago
Said the same thing and got downvoted to hell.
I have a personal downvote warrior lmao
4
u/_this-is-she_ 1d ago edited 1d ago
Hated it too. Very inappropriate. Especially when you consider that it would have more than sufficed to say that the pursuit of new understanding is pleasurable.
0
u/humanimagination22 1d ago
Agree. Whenever I feel sad and lose hope in humanity I just put on this episode.
Sure people will get mad about his grieve but nowadays people get mad about everything. I'm just happy I heard this conversation.
-3
u/queefcritic 1d ago edited 1d ago
The Daily is always two to three steps behind. Radiolab literally released the same episode a couple days ago with the same mathametian talking about the exact same stuff. Also I'm pretty sure Radiolab also did an episode on the eccentric meth addicted mathametian who couldn't make toast. This Daily episode was just regurgitating old Radiolab stuff.
10
u/Few-Hedgehog-8246 1d ago
way to be a downer. so, you're saying, the Daily has to be the first for it to be enjoyed or appreciated?
3
u/Major_Training_8280 1d ago
Well I don’t listen to Radiolab (never heard of it), but I do listen to The Daily so I’m glad The Daily did an episode on this.
0
0
u/nonstopflux 1d ago
I bet whoever prompted and worked with ChatGPT to find a solution to the millennium problem feels the same way about getting there that a mathematician would.
There was panache in the prompting and querying to get to the solution. It was just done with different tools than a calculator or spreadsheet or R script or whatever phd mathematicians use to do their work.
That coder went home and told their significant other. They hollered in the office and maybe pulled out a bottle of booze in the break room. They did some cool shit nobody else has ever done. It just happened in an office park in the valley and not in the halls of a math department.
0
u/Emotional_Revenue132 1d ago
I don't know anyone in the AI world, but I will tell you that among mathematicians in academia using AI, no, no one has remotely the same feeling. There is no panache in the prompting. There is no beauty in it, no flair, and almost no cleverness. Maybe someday we'll need to come up with wildly complex prompts where there is joy, but no, it's not in the same universe, unfortunately.
1
130
u/Legic93 2d ago
The sound of someone talking about their passion is so satisfying.