Comment by gpm

11 hours ago

> Unless [...] mathematicians are effectively useless?

It's always been a bit bizarre that this isn't the case. Mathematicians are almost always working on problems that there is no good reason to expect to have utility in the real world... problems they selected because of their elegance or whatever... yet there is a strong historical trend of their work having huge importance after the fact. Sometimes in fields that weren't even invented yet at the time of the work.

There's something to be said for the idea that disrupting a system that is working well for no apparent reason is a bad idea.

So solving and discovering math is or is not the core value a mathematician provides?

If AI can perfectly replicate their work but faster and better then what?

SWE have nobody crying for them as they've been massively disrupted.

  • Mathematicians provide two complementary services bundled together.

    1. Proving theorems - what AI can apparently replicate faster and better.

    2. Creating definitions and new theorems from those definitions to prove, selecting which of the possible statements to work on. I.e. developing the "language" of mathematics. So far there is no evidence that LLM can do this at all well. And there's some reason to think that mathematicians won't be as good at this if they aren't also doing the first part.

    The value to society only comes when they do both "well", and it's 2 which is really the black magic where we don't understand why they've been so useful to us.

    • Fair take.

      So I totally agree if AI also cannot do the second part better than a person.

      Honestly though, I wouldn't want to take that bet. I never thought that the first thing AI would become super human AGI like is math.

      You ask me 10years ago and I'd think the opposite. I think we all would have said we'd have super human HR employees before a super human mathematician.

      But here we are.

      1 reply →

  • Think of it like software going from programmers understanding every instruction, knowing where every byte of memory was being used and why, and using this knowledge to build optimised systems

    During the process of optimising and understanding the programmer might learn something new or have some kind of "aha" moment of insight that might lead them down a new path of study where fantastic new technologies and capabilities can be realised

    Fast forward to 2026

    Most web pages take several seconds to load

    Applications crash often for no apparent reason

    A vast majority of programmers have no idea what their applications are actually really even doing anymore, so they stack bloat on top of bloat and if something breaks, well I guess that's someone elses problem cos I have no idea what's going on anymore

    There's something to be said about levels of abstraction being useful, but abstracting away understanding of the task itself is not the path to generating useful knowledge or applications for humanity

    We might be gaining the "what" but we are losing the "why" and the "how" and these are generally fundamentally more important

    The answer is 42 but what is the question?

Math academia was not working well at all. Almost every single graduated from my PhD program wound up working in ads or finance.

The gatekeeping in math academia is extremely unfair, or should I say objectively fair but personally unfair. I won’t cry crocodile tears.

  • > wound up working in ads or finance

    Because there's lots and lots of money in that and there's not in funding pure math. It sounds like your problem is with the people holding the purse strings.