The problem here is that while you can call what OpenAI does "mathematics", I would hesitate to call it science. Science as a process of acquiring and developing knowledge within a domain involves a lot more than just dumping unfinished work on the scientific community. Among other things, it involves developing frameworks and understanding of the domain, formulating questions, creating results in a fashion suitable for verification/testing/replication, and relating these results to and integrating them with that edifice.

▲

ComplexSystems 8 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Have you looked around recently? Because there are plenty of mathematicians that are excited to read and learn about all of the new results. They've improved on the sub-n log n result and have even made a web site to track progress on it: https://beyond-n-log-n.netlify.app/

It looks like people are enjoying themselves, having fun with the new results, and generally doing all of the things you say "science" is supposed to be about. So what's the problem?

▲

rbehrends 8 hours ago | parent | next [-]

I didn't say it is useless. Consider Ramanujan, whose work gave rise to a lot of interesting math, even (and sometimes, especially) the parts that lacked proofs or had other gaps (probably because it was obvious to him unlike us mere mortals). But a singular genius, whether a person or a machine, does not science make.

▲

emkoemko 7 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

why are AI sites so hard to read... is it the terrible contrast? or something? any designers here?

	▲	demibabs 7 hours ago \| parent [-]
		There’s so much information, but it has no idea where to put the focus. Why is the number of PRs the same size as the actual best result?

▲

judge2020 8 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Kinda sounds like computer science vs developing - in the sense that people with a master's in CS and are dedicated to the craft will write wonderfully artistic software, while it doesn't actually take a love for the process to write code and get hired at some tech company (even less so now with agentic development).

	▲	rbehrends 8 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Not what I am getting at. In fact, the problem I am getting at is the abolition of existing scientific and engineering principles and processes without a replacement and applies to programming with agents as well. This is not about artistry, but about building durable things.

▲

computerex 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Except for the fact that academia today is bs:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LKiBlGDfRU8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=shFUDPqVmTg