AI has made the race to publish mathematical breakthroughs pointless, according to the Australian at the centre of an controversy this week involving one of the world's top AI companies.
No. I can’t give any examples because I personally don’t give a damn, but there have been ‘pointlessly’ solved equations which only became of use much later in modern branches of technology.
Random crap nobody cares about have a small chance to be useful in the far future for stuff we currently are unaware of.
I mean my point being that traditionally, least historically, the idea of maths being solved for the purpose of a useful function was a bit banal, a bit frowned upon or looked down on.
And by ‘they’, do you mean the hypothetical mathematicians in your mind that would prefer that their maths is not applicable to any kind of practical applications?
Specific mathematicians and societies which were critical to the early development of the field. It is at the very core of the culture, at least in its origination.
Math was pure philosophy and a pursuit for the landed gentry.
Not sure why anyone thinks this is controversial. Its all there in the history books. This is what they said about themselves.
Pointless as in “the end result might not be useful for any real world application”, often yes. But as I understand it, now it’s become a different flavor of pointless, “might not even be able to solve it before an AI steals the work I’ve done so far, solves it before I can, and gets all the credit”, which takes even the intrinsic motivation out of it.
Wasn’t solving maths problems always a bit pointless? Not sure mathematicians necessarily pursued the field because of its pointfullness
No. I can’t give any examples because I personally don’t give a damn, but there have been ‘pointlessly’ solved equations which only became of use much later in modern branches of technology.
Random crap nobody cares about have a small chance to be useful in the far future for stuff we currently are unaware of.
I mean my point being that traditionally, least historically, the idea of maths being solved for the purpose of a useful function was a bit banal, a bit frowned upon or looked down on.
Oh, snobbism. I see, my bad.
Yeah that was like their whole thing.
And by ‘they’, do you mean the hypothetical mathematicians in your mind that would prefer that their maths is not applicable to any kind of practical applications?
Specific mathematicians and societies which were critical to the early development of the field. It is at the very core of the culture, at least in its origination.
Math was pure philosophy and a pursuit for the landed gentry.
Not sure why anyone thinks this is controversial. Its all there in the history books. This is what they said about themselves.
Pointless as in “the end result might not be useful for any real world application”, often yes. But as I understand it, now it’s become a different flavor of pointless, “might not even be able to solve it before an AI steals the work I’ve done so far, solves it before I can, and gets all the credit”, which takes even the intrinsic motivation out of it.
Any maths to do with cryptography certainly isn’t pointless. So P=NP is definitely consequential.
I think you missed the point.