You're proving the GP's argument - LLMs aren't creative you say as much, it's the driving that is the creative force

lajamerr 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

You can tell an agentic system. "Go and find a novel area of math that has unresolved answers and solve it mathematically with verified properties in LEAN. Verify before you start working on a problem that no one has solved this area of math"

That's not creative prompt. That's a driving prompt to get it to start its engine.

You could do that nowadays and while it may spend $1,000 to $100,000 worth of tokens. It will create something humans haven't done before as long as you set it up with all its tool calls/permissions.

▲

awesome_dude 2 hours ago | parent [-]

Let me know when the Fields medal arrives in the mail.

It won't because even though it looks clever to you, people who /do/ understand math and LLMs understand that LLMs /are/ regurgitating

Why does your LLM need you to tell it to look in the first place? Why isn't just telling us all the answers to unsolved conjectures known and unknown?

Why isn't the LLM just telling us all the answers to all the problems we are facing?

Why isn't the LLM telling us, step by step with zero error, how to build the machine that can answer the ultimate question?

▲

astrange an hour ago | parent [-]

Here's a Fields Medalist commenting who doesn't seem to believe that.

https://x.com/wtgowers/status/2057175727271800912

▲

awesome_dude an hour ago | parent [-]

Um - all I see is

> Timothy Gowers @wtgowers

> @wtgowers

> If you are a mathematician, then you may want to make sure you are sitting down before reading further.

If your refutation requires someone to have an account, login, and read something - it's meaningless

▲

defrost an hour ago | parent | next [-]

Try https://xcancel.com/wtgowers/status/2057175727271800912

it's readable to most, it's annoying having to swamp through ex-Twitter .. but there are work around's.

▲

awesome_dude an hour ago | parent [-]

Thanks - I'll read that and the above linked OpenAI PR

But, I remain sceptical

	▲	defrost 37 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		The (linked by OpenAI) comment paper by various tangential mathematicians was the most interesting read from my PoV: https://cdn.openai.com/pdf/74c24085-19b0-4534-9c90-465b8e29a... it includes the longer remarks by Gowers & others.

▲

astrange an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

https://cdn.openai.com/pdf/74c24085-19b0-4534-9c90-465b8e29a...

▲

charlie90 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I believe when we have AI Agents "living" 24/7, they will become creative machines. They will test ideas out their own ideas experimentally, come across things accidentally, synthesize new ideas.

We just haven't let AI run wild yet. But its coming.

	▲	awesome_dude 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		So are self-driving cars - as they have been for the last... decade or so AGI has been "just over the horizon" for literal decades now - there have been a number of breakthroughs and AI Winters in the past, and there's no real reason to believe that we've suddenly found the magic potion, when clearly we haven't. AI right now cannot even manage simple /logic/

▲

Barbing 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

If that’s a requirement, aren’t LLMs driven by pretraining which was human driven?

Who decides at which the last point it’s OK to provide text to the model in order to be able to describe it as creative? (non-rhetorical)