ranzispa

What are you voting for if there’s no plan? Gut feeling? I like that guy?

How is that acceptable, a person who’s not even able to make up a plan is definitely not fit for government.

There’s plenty podcasts where university professors explain their discipline.

What I’m saying is that also LLMs grew organically. Machine learning developed organically through the years and LLMs are one of the products of such development.

Machine learning algorithms were absolutely desired and wanted, hundreds of thousands of people worked on developing them. It is a very useful technology. If I may list one very useful development: AlphaFold, for which the 2024 Nobel prize was adjudicated.

Now, whether LLMs are useful in chemistry and biology: kind of. Coming up with the design of a bacteriophage is not the first use which would come to my mind. Of course LLMs are being tested for their applications in such domains, but results are in general worse than dedicated models. One area in which I see value is the use of agents in orchestrating tools and analyzing results. Not really in producing new things on their own.

I come from a chemistry background. Chemistry is one of the first field in which machine learning was first applied. In fact many of the first algorithms and models have been developed by chemists.

This has been a gradual adoption throughout the past 50 years.

How is this different from your description of the internet history? If anything, internet was much faster than that: it took less than 50 years from the first computer to the invention of internet.

And I’m not even considering the first developments in machine learning, which happened pretty much as soon as computing machines were invented.

I did not read the full article since it is paywalled.

But well, nobody asked for the internet either.

Indeed peer reviewed exists in mathematics. Now, whether it is common practice to publish stuff on arxiv and leave it there is another thing.

I don’t know about mathematics, but I know plenty other Fields where it is common practice to just publish on arxiv.

Two researchers came to the same solution to a problem. In my books that’s better than peer review.

If you wish, this was indipendently confirmed: the same proof was published by two authors at the same time.

scientificamerican.com/…/ai-helped-produce-two-pr…

Scientists don’t often publish when they confirm an article is correct. Knowing a few mathematicians, probably they see no need to do that. They checked the proof, it was ok and that’s it.

Either way, many of those proofs come with a computer program which checks and confirms the proof is correct.

I trust that an expert mathematician talking about such things has reviewed a few of those articles and has checked the proof.

You may not do that; check the proof yourself or pay a mathematician to do it for you.

Yes, scientific articles are expensive. I know that, that sucks. That’s why most of this stuff is on arxiv.

I linked to evidence that mathematicians are using LLMs to find proofs and publish those proofs. Which is what I said is happening.

…stackexchange.com/…/can-i-publish-a-novel-theore…

I am not a mathematician, thus I don’t really know where to find indipendent confirmation or even how that is generally handled by mathematicians. However: there are plenty proofs on arxiv that disclose have been found with LLMs. Some of these proofs relate to famous problems and have been in the news. Fields medal winners discuss the importance of LLMs and how it may produce too many proofs for humans to handle.

I trust that those proofs published on arxiv have been reviewed by many mathematicians, if they were incorrect that would have rapidly become known.

www.nature.com/articles/d41586-026-01553-1

e.vnexpress.net/…/fields-medalist-terence-tao-war…

Articles with proofs have been published, both by AI companies as well as by mathematicians who disclosed the whole development of the proof was done autonomously by LLMs.

They’re running tests 24/7 and there is a single person responsible for that which can be called at any moment?

Shouldn’t be to expensive for Tesla to just hire a couple people more and split work into shifts.

I went through a few of those videos. Could not notice any artifact. If I had to evaluate myself I’d say it is actresses.

Really not easy to say those videos are made by AI.

I can see how this is a big problem. However, having saved a man some time ago from suicide after correctly interpreting a very cryptic message I could see how one such system may be useful if it worked correctly.

Good luck finding a 25 years old EV.

Any mathematician here who reviewed the correctness and relevance of these proofs?

Most of the people developing AI are Linux users.

How is this legal?

We’re going to close your business in 24 hours if you don’t make money.

Here’s 350$ to save your business.

Oh, you don’t have the code to pay with your debit card, figure it out I guess.

I mean, would they have done better in such conditions?