Re:On the Navier–Stokes Millennium Prize Problem
by reducesuffering on Tuesday September 08, 2026 @02:39PM
(#49614751)
Yes a couple of elite mathematicians working on the problem for a year, which AGI solved in a fraction of the time. What about everyone else 100IQ? What about as the models are even better 1 year from now, 2 years? The trajectory hasn't abated.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:On the Navier–Stokes Millennium Prize Problem
by mlsu on Tuesday September 08, 2026 @02:50PM
(#49614924)
I don't know one way or another but there is a credible allegation that the "AGI" was training on the (very extensive) test set that these two mathematicians produced.
If that is true then this seems to be, again, a case of AI producing an interpolation over data it has seen before. Everything about openAI's behavior indicates that they were using the transcripts as input. Why not have the AGI choose a different Millenium prize problem?
Re:On the Navier–Stokes Millennium Prize Problem
by FabCH on Tuesday September 08, 2026 @06:14PM
(#49617917)
Almost all of human development is interpolation over data we have seen before.
It’s not exactly a strong argument against AI.
Re:On the Navier–Stokes Millennium Prize Problem
by FridgeSeal on Tuesday September 08, 2026 @07:55PM
(#49618858)
If ~~someone gives you a hint about an approach~~ you steal someone’s notes about a promising approach, and then you hire 10,000 people to brute force the problem basically everyone would consider that “shitty behaviour”, “theft”, and “poor form”.
Re:On the Navier–Stokes Millennium Prize Problem
by FabCH on Wednesday September 09, 2026 @04:30AM
(#49623190)
Correct.
That's not interpolation though, that's theft.
Re:On the Navier–Stokes Millennium Prize Problem
by j_maffe on Tuesday September 08, 2026 @06:26PM
(#49618036)
> in a fraction of the time
Well if you do the math, the number of agent-compute time in total, given the insane number of agents thrown at the problem, might end up being comparable in time, if not for the budget.