logoalt Hacker News

robotpepiyesterday at 9:26 PM4 repliesview on HN

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.


Replies

flatlineyesterday at 10:12 PM

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.

show 1 reply
erutoday at 5:24 AM

Well, what you are saying that the situation is even better for math than for chess?

Chess is only valuable as an entertainment. So no one really gains anything from computers becoming really good at chess.

But with math, everyone in the world would gain from computers becoming really, really good at it.

show 1 reply
phoghedyesterday at 11:13 PM

> 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

show 2 replies
JoshTripletttoday at 3:44 AM

> What you seem to suggest is that AI will be able to completely (or at least in a great part) replace mathematicians.

There is no bound on the amibitions of AI. AI is set to replace anything done by people, and there won't be any room left for people. There isn't any task done by humans that AI won't be better at.

This is not a tenable outcome.

We should never have built machines with agency, rather than optimization processes that operate as subroutines of humans.

show 2 replies