Hacker News Reader

Comment by p-e-w | Hacker News Reader

So there were mathematicians who would have solved Navier-Stokes, Quasi-Riemann, and ETH, if only AI hadn’t snatched away and finished off their work they were just wrapping up?

People will be getting second-hand embarrassment when they read these comments in the future.

View on HN

You seem to be coming from the position that the benevolent, independently thinking, fully aligned AI has graced humanity with a forever gift. But actually it's a privately owned company, built on the collective of human intelligence, apparently stealing from active research and blessing a small few with partial credit.

There are ways to do what they are doing ethically. But this isn't it.

Indeed, all credit should belong to the human researchers who collected the facts and traced the way.

However, with an eye on private AI as a business desperate for attention and profits, the only way out of this is to build open source research AI - better than anything the closed frontiers have to offer. It should be under the full control of the people who use it and trained to support the accepted ethics and citation discipline.

> trained to support the accepted ethics

This ought to be good. Please share. Be specific.

https://tenor.com/en-CA/view/eating-popcorn-deer-hungry-yum-...

True, but then the 'closed source' research AI company will do what they just did: siphon up all your research, add a bit of their own and beat you at your own game. You can't win this by playing by the rules, they are using a different set of rules and with an entirely different level of funding. Think about it: the amount of money and compute they have at their disposal is larger than that that of all universities combined.

The point is that no human had access to the same data, because the LLM used the unpublished work of a number of mathematicians. The only way for a human to gain access to the same work, i.e. the same dots to connect, is to be in active collaboration with those mathematicians. In which case they would all be included in the resulting paper.

Some of the QRH results, for example, weren't due to unpublished work. The AI pulled together a number of ideas that were known to people, but who didn't realize that connecting them would work. I detect more chagrin than outrage.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com