potbelly83

Agreed. It's frustrating how everyone is pointing to the lean "proof", as if it's somehow irrefutable evidence that the problems have been solved.

Falling back on a RL pipeline to cover gaps always strikes me as a more sophisticated version of the mechanical turk. If what we had was truly AGI wouldn't they be able to derive this from the data they already have.

This is a great analogy, and one I'm surprised more people haven't raised. Instead all your hear are comments about mathematicians being sour losers, they should have know the model terms of service etc...

Yeah but her laugh /s

The crazy thing is, they did have warning, but these were ignored due to organizations failing to share information amongst each other.

Robert Fitzgerald also here. Was drawn to the more poetic verses.

Sometimes reading these articles I can't help but think we've pushed ourselves into a local but sup-optimal maximum technologically speaking. i.e. If we didn't follow the path of trying to stick everything into an iPhone/Android (along with moving everything into the cloud), we'd have a more interesting technological landscape.

I have no idea why these sorts of posts are popular. Past college you're not going to learn physics by trying to self-study an entire university course. The best way to learn is just to pick a small part of physics you'd like to learn (preferably related to your job), i.e. how GPS work or some fluid mechanics etc... Then learn the physics you need for that. Knowledge accumulation can't be organized in a straight line, it happens non-linearly and generally builds upon small wins that are useful for you.

Great point, I think the argument you could make about Tao (fairly or unfairly) is he never tries to build that framework.

That's not what op is arguing. To use your example, coming up with singular examples of continuous non-differentiable functions is an example of "ugly" mathematics, whereas putting them into a nice framework where they can be analyzed as a whole (i.e. functional analysis, density of such functions, etc...) is an example "elegant and insightful" mathematics. The same with the monster group, on its own maybe nothing special, but then you have the connections with other branches of math. Tao seems so focused on the individual problems and not their connections/generalizations.

Education yes, research unfortunately no. I'm not saying research outside of academia is not possible, I'm just saying it's not taken seriously and this needs to change. We really do need to go back to the 19th century model of the researcher gentleman.

see yosefk reply above

Why not have the program touch a file on success?

agreed, imagine what a Michael Lewis type writer could make of this story