I really hate this overly condescending takes. First of all, what do you know about the internals of math research that allows you to speak with so much confidence. Second, you're not even addressing the issues raised by the letter! This is not about "oh they made a bunch of problems easier". There are huge economical interest behind: who owns and has access to models? are these companies interested in developing research or they just grind PR stunts without worrying about externalities in how research is actually conducted? Etc etc.

▲

Bourget 4 hours ago | parent [-]

If it's worth anything: I have a PhD in (theoretical) mathematics and I entirely stand by stabbles' comment.

There is a real, undeniable possibility of AI becoming better at mathematics in the same way that it became better at chess and Go, and in such a scenario, one may expect the community's response to be comparable.

▲

robotpepi 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

It makes no sense to compare mathematics with chess. Chess is a sport. No one is interested in watching two machines compete. Chess doesn't have a practical impact. Etc. What you seem to suggest is that AI will be able to completely (or at least in a great part) replace mathematicians. It could be the case in the future, but no one knows right now, and more importantly: tech companies don't even think about it! they don't think on the externalities.

▲

flatline 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Does mathematics still have a practical impact without humans in the loop? I don't think there's one single answer to that question, but I think it's worth considering exactly what that impact may be.

Tech companies are as much the topic of this post as AI, I think that's the immediacy.

	▲	jeremyjh an hour ago \| parent [-]
		To a significant extent, the pursuit of mathematics research is a pursuit of human understanding of mathematics, without knowing where it might lead, or whether it might lead anywhere at all. I don't see how the motivation for that goes away on its own, but the institution supporting it is certainly threatened by the potential loss of grant money and graduate student applications.

▲

phoghed 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

> No one is interested in watching two machines compete

I’ve watched quite a lot of YouTube videos where two machines compete, so you may not be completely right here

	▲	sebastiansm7 20 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		https://tcec-chess.com/ Top chess engine championship is pretty fun to watch.

▲

3ash14 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Stockfish isn't owned by a club of three trillionaires. It does not cost $15 million to achieve a result in Stockfish.

Stockfish does not steal research or scoop researchers.

The concentration of computing resources and capital should be examined by the math community.

	▲	coderenegade an hour ago \| parent [-]
		This is the real problem. We're looking at a future where those who control AI have an insurmountable advantage in everything. They can control the amount of intelligence the masses have access to -- for their own safety, of course -- and they will never, ever be able to close the gap.