Comment by ecshafer

9 hours ago

Terrance Tao's chatgpt conversation is really interesting for a variety of reasons:

1. The counter example wasn't just a brute force selection, the polynomial is structured in a very specific way that ends up getting the result.

2. Terry Tao's questions are very specific and prompts the AI in a useful way, that without high math training you are not going to get the same information out of it. Terry seems to see some aspects of the problem and counter example and uses AI to brute force some parts of it.

It feels very humbling that here is one of the smartest humans on the planet asking questions, and the LLM keeps answering in this "Yes, it's really simple if you think about it" way, like a professor talking to a talented student.

  • I had a similar reaction with the language but also response times and language. It reminded me of a quote about Jon von Neumann from Edward Teller:

    "Von Neumann would carry on a conversation with my 3-year-old son, and the two of them would talk as equals, and I sometimes wondered if he used the same principle when he talked to the rest of us."

  • I hate it when it picks that register. I think it stops if you contradict it more, which he’s not doing.

It is ~a meme on subreddits that developers struggling to get good results out of any given model is a "skills issue."

But I think your comment drives at some authentic take on this. Skill with AI is not only crafting iterative prompts the agent will understand, but also very high domain-specific knowledge of what the prompts explore.

One without the other can result in frustration or worse.

  • A naive hope is: you see that the LLM is so good at coding that all you need to do is supply a "yes/no" on what you want.

    Turns out that understanding the technical domain is important to getting good results, even if the LLM is more capable at producing output. -- It's still a case of "garbage in, garbage out".

    I think for many newbies, they see the LLM is so good at programming and so figure they don't need to learn anything. Apparently not so.

I think we have a couple of years of "being good at talking to the LLM about your field of expertise" being a useful human skill, until that too gets washed away

  • Maybe?

    At the end of the day, even if they are some insane oracle (pun intended), they're still bounded by training data and how it relates to the real world. Even if they're a near perfect tool, we are still the interface between them and our lived experience. If that stops being the case then why do we care about the output?

    This assumes it doesn't graduate to just killing all of us and doing it's own thing, but within this paradigm it doesn't really have goals.

    • >Even if they're a near perfect tool, we are still the interface between them and our lived experience.

      Until they are embedded into automatons that can interact with the world.

      (To be clear, I'm both on board with this, and I think it's the natural progression. Currently they are bounded by their training set, but interaction with the world is the imperative for theory -> test -> analysis -> update that is essential for growth and creativity.)

    • they're still bounded by training data and how it relates to the real world.

      Yes and no. They can extrapolate and build upon the training data, as was the case with the last dozens of math proofs

      1 reply →

A Minimizer addicted to upvotes.

A community of those who distract themselves from the perfectly fixable problems in their lives corruptly self-evaluates. They validate each other's stagnation and unwillingness to move by finding flaws in each day that will enable shutting off the flow of any new data while condemning the world and any actions in it. The lay-z-boy they collectively protect appears as corroboration with a broad population but is in reality a repetition whose independence is meaningless since they are all copies of one system, one kind of person in the same kind of trap.

Immobile. Clogging the Suez with their sandbagging ways. Nothing to add except reasons to stay put. No aspiration. Only cynicism. They deserve nothing but all of our contempt.