How much do you all think it would cost to "buy" these advances from PhDs, practicing scientists?

This isn't really a productive way to think about these things, IMO. It's quite possible it would take hundreds of years for any specific group of PhDs to solve them. Or one individual PhD could have the correct flash of insight and solve it in a month. There's absolutely no way to predict this, besides trying to gauge the apparent simplicity of the proof or counterexample (which is likely to be misleading). Until someone actually runs an experiment like this it's not a viable metric.

▲

0x5FC3 5 hours ago | parent | next [-]

I understand and I am not trying to deny the impressiveness or the velocity of AI in general. But at some point we have to ask how much do we trust the labs at face value without much transparency of how they got to the results when there is trillions of dollars on the line.

▲

simianwords 5 hours ago | parent [-]

The level of conspiracy theory is nuts

▲

0x5FC3 5 hours ago | parent [-]

I would say the lack of skepticism is nuts, honestly.

	▲	frozenseven 5 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Capabilities of this sort have already been demonstrated by independent parties, and models have consistently gotten better at this. Yes, insinuating that mathematicians and scientists are secretly solving decades-old problems on OpenAI's behalf is an insane conspiracy theory.

▲

jacki 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

[flagged]

▲

jgeralnik 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

A friend’s PhD advisor has been chasing non-sofic groups for 25 years (and was shown a preprint of the results by openai to verify them). He believed a solution would be Fields-worthy

This was not a problem that was for sale