Replying to @unknownuserunknownlocation@kbin.earth
😋 🤣

Replying to @unknownuserunknownlocation@kbin.earth
😋 🤣
Replying to @alastel@lemmy.ml
The perfect solution.
Replying to @CompactFlax@discuss.tchncs.de
LOL that’s just, I don’t know, hilarious? 🤪
Replying to @aBundleOfFerrets@sh.itjust.works
Yes this is crazy, Apple is usually 100% on top of ensuring enough supplies.
I think this is more telling about how crazy the situation is than many other things I’ve read.
Replying to @ranzispa@mander.xyz
This sounds like something you outright made up.
Classical unsolved math problems have rewards.
Mathematics absolutely have peer review:
PubMedOn the Nature and Role of Peer Review in Mathematics - PubMedFor the past three decades, peer review practices have received much attention in the literature. But although this literature covers many research fields, only one previous systematic study has been devoted to the practice of peer review in mathematics, namely a study by Geist, Löwe, and Van Kerkho …Replying to @ranzispa@mander.xyz
Neither paper has been peer-reviewed
But that’s not really the point, the point is that yes maybe AI can solve long standing mathematical problems, but they need to be confirmed by REAL mathematicians.
Because AI has been shown to hallucinate and lie when presented with problems they can’t solve.
There are many claims about AI solving hard mathematical problems, but very few that are confirmed. These stories seem to at least to some degree to act as advertising for AI services.
Replying to @ranzispa@mander.xyz
Yes, scientific articles are expensive.
Doesn’t have to be scientific articles, it can easily be a normal article that state that scientists have confirmed the findings independently.
This is a very common thing for normal media to describe. The second article you linked would most probably have included that if such confirmation existed.
I linked to evidence that mathematicians are using LLMs to find proofs
No you didn’t, the article described a researcher testing the capabilities of AI, nothing in the article was really about math, it was all about the AI, and the whole story reeks of sensationalism.
Replying to @ranzispa@mander.xyz
There is no evidence stated in the first article, and it’s paywalled.
The second article doesn’t show independent confirmation that the alleged proofs are real. Which was exactly what the original criticism was about.
Yes we all know the claims, and you have done nothing but parroting those claims without evidence.
Replying to @ranzispa@mander.xyz
Which is way more possible to link to. But you chose not to?
Replying to @PlexSheep@infosec.pub
This is not about the mathematical evidence, but the lack of evidence that AI has made mathematical breakthroughs.
The point here is there is rarely any evidence for the claims about AI amazing accomplishments.
The burden of proof is on the one with the claim that AI has made these accomplishments, not on the one being sceptic about it.
Replying to @Treczoks@lemmy.world
This is not about the mathematical evidence, but the lack of evidence that AI has made mathematical breakthroughs.
Replying to @beep@piefed.world
You don’t really need sources, we all know AI tends to hallucinate when presented with a problem they can’t solve.
So far I’ve only read about 1 example of a problem that an AI may have solved. All the rest are without details and are not confirmed in any way.
Remember AI companies are huge on propaganda for their technology, but not so big on admitting the shortcomings.
Edit:
Changed the use of the word evidence to sources, because apparently people misunderstood it.
Replying to @cyberpunk007@lemmy.ca
There is already no need for mathematicians, I can perfectly well make any square root on my calculator. 🤣
Replying to @bitteroldcoot@piefed.social
Absolutely this. You can also add supercomputers.
AI may help the field move further, but real mathematicians are still needed to evaluate the meaning of such findings.
Replying to @beep@piefed.world
Absolutely no way.
Even if AI can make mathematical breakthroughs as in evidence of hard to solve problems. We still need mathematicians to clear it as valid.
I imagine AI might actually sharpen the understanding among real mathematicians.
AI didn’t make Chess or Go obsolete either.
Replying to @nocturne@slrpnk.net
So instead of it being crazy in itself that Linux use should triple within a few months, you suggest that a tiny fragment of the Linux ecosphere alone is responsible?
I think the more likely explanation here is that the collection of data or use of the data behind the stat is flawed.
Replying to @blackbeans@lemmy.zip
maybe we shouldn’t allow USA to decide European foreign policy? Just a thought.
Replying to @inari@piefed.zip
Absolutely, although China can’t match Nvidia yet, they can now make chips that are good enough for 90% of the tasks.
Nvidia can no longer sell their second rate products developed specially for China anymore either.
Replying to @inari@piefed.zip
Due to Western export restrictions, ASML is only allowed to export some of these machines to China; the most modern equipment is subject to a complete blockade.
In the past quarter, 14 percent of the machines that ASML sold went to China.
Play stupid games and win stupid prizes.
Preventing one of your biggest customers (China) from getting the equipment they need forces them to make it themselves.
Now China can make their own DUV lithography machines of similar quality to the ones they can get from ASML.
And obviously it won’t stop there, China will continue to improve, and probably in a few years compete with ASML on the high end EUV equipment too.
Replying to @sanitation@lemmy.today
SpaceX, Tesla, Alphabet, Micron, Nvidia and Amazon all in red for July!?
IDK if the AI bubble is bursting now, but it seems like the hunger for AI heavy stock is cooling off.
I don’t think it will be too long before hardware prices return to normal, it could be within a year or two.