“Math 2.0” will need to value mathematical progress more holistically

Re:“Math 2.0” will need to value mathematical progress more ... by autuni on Thursday October 08, 2026 @02:39AM (#50002484)

I think your second bucket would need to be changed, as it's not really undecided for some and Tao in fact argues (in a way) that there is no need for the field to decide. There is a need for results, but there is also a need for humans to fully understand why the results are the way they are and how they were obtained. This doesn't replace the human in the loop it's more of a cooperative effort.

I'd end up with the buckets

a) Fully human

b) Hybrid human-AI

c) Fully AI

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:“Math 2.0” will need to value mathematical progress more ... by lioeters on Thursday October 08, 2026 @10:27AM (#50006238)

Extrapolating from the list, the "Fully AI" camp is going to push the pedal to the metal, investing time and effort into maximizing their fusion with this technology. Mentally enhanced and amplified 24/7, and likely physically too, fusing their biology with hardware and robotics. Within a few years, not even a generation, they will become unrecognizable to the "Fully Human" category.

[ Parent | on HN ]