undefined

points

[-]

Yes? We haven’t solved many puzzles about reality, but even half proofs and conjectures create tools that other people use to make progress.

I’ve made this point elsewhere but the debate here is between two different philosophical positions. Results vs process.

If all you care about is the results then the process doesn’t matter.

If a person is starving or needs medicine, then a long discussion on process is inhumane. They need results.

If the conversation is about process though, then focusing on the results is missing the point.

I’d say the question for results oriented people is what are the benefits of the process and at what point does it make sense to optimize for results vs process.

by _heimdall8 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

My read on much of the discussion here is that the debate is whether we want AIs solving problems that career mathematicians may spend a lifetime on and still not solve.

When the topic is about careers the question really has to be about results. Even if the results are made by solving different problems discovered along the way towards their original problem, it still has to be about those results.

There is absolutely a question of whether burning these resources is useful when the only outcome is a solution to a potentially obscure math problem, but that is more a question of prompting and goals rather than the use of these tools themselves.

by intended7 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

> There is absolutely a question of whether burning these resources is useful when the only outcome is a solution to a potentially obscure math problem, but that is more a question of prompting and goals rather than the use of these tools themselves.

Could you elaborate?