I don't have much to add to the math parts, but I've read all your answers in this thread and wanted to thank you for taking the time to offer a detailed perspective from a subject matter expert. Thank you!
replyActually reminds me of patent law. Prior art ist a defined term which includes all standard literature on one topic. To evaluate, whether the new solution is really inventive and thus patentable, one consults prior art, selects the most promising starting point, and from there asks oneself if an all-knowing but uncreative specialist would come up with the solution by himself. If he wouldn't, the condition of inventiveness is satisfied.
replyMakes me wonder how the patent space will be disrupted when that inventiveness step becomes obsolete because of LLMs. Given your example above, it seems like a combination of different methods from many different sources. This would be regarded as inventive, clearly. If eligible patents can now be brute-forced, the bottleneck becomes only selecting the most promising ones and paying for the patent.
Oh man, we should talk. I have been working on a patent with ChatGPT specifically to get around two complementary patents that are now together because of a corporate merger this year. I am not sure how much longer anything is going to be patentable with this kind of design assistance available to everyone.
replyAlso, once upon a time I wanted to be a patent lawyer. It's incredibly hard to sit for the patent bar if you have a pure math degree and don't have an engineering degree. Thankfully New Hampshire lets anyone sit for the FE exam.
Did anyone else wince at seeing the phrase "load-bearing"?
replyI did as I wrote it. I actually used that phrase often before it became an LLM-ism, just like how I rather enjoyed peppering my writing with em-dashes. Oh well.
replyLanguage constructs becoming aggressively passé due to AI saturation is one of the craziest outcomes of all of this stuff—one which I don't think anyone saw coming.
replyAre there no loads left to be borne?
one hopes at least that the taboo on the bearing of loads is restricted to metaphorical loads only, lest lorry drivers and porters become the next victim of the algospeak spectre
replydeleted
replyKasteleyn signs definitely have math counterparts (Arf invariants). They’re just not as well-known.
replyRight. And I'm kicking myself for not having the mathematical breadth to know about them.
replyWhy? Physics people I talked to didn't know either.
reply