News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:“Math 2.0” will need to value mathematical progress more ... by schleck8 on Thursday October 08, 2026 @03:27AM (#50002812)
> but simply dumping proofs on the math community and expecting others to do the grunt work of verifying, refining, and expanding on them is hardly a productive way to advance the field

This is a transitive period. In a few years, verification and exchange between model instances will happen faster than humans can follow. Human input will be an ethical question, and not a productivity one, because it will be the bottleneck in any science.

Re:“Math 2.0” will need to value mathematical progress more ... by psychoslave on Thursday October 08, 2026 @04:16AM (#50003153)
Etic is a factor of productivity, and the larger the contextual window is the weightier it becomes. That’s even integrated within the paperclip parabola.

If the focus in placed on maximizing some easily measurable output on a narrow perspective, situation is unlikely going to match a sweet spot of holistic equilibrium which is maximizing harmony and happiness through humanity as a whole.

Re:“Math 2.0” will need to value mathematical progress more ... by Muromec on Thursday October 08, 2026 @03:37AM (#50002882)
And what use of that?
Re:“Math 2.0” will need to value mathematical progress more ... by RandomLensman on Thursday October 08, 2026 @06:04AM (#50003912)
How to make sure it doesn't evolve into some sort of Library of Babel of science?
Re:“Math 2.0” will need to value mathematical progress more ... by schleck8 on Thursday October 08, 2026 @08:18AM (#50004913)
That's the billion dollar question. Nvidia currently wants to deploy chips with the sole purpose of monitoring agentic workloads and that doesn't seem farfetched but they obviously have a financial motive to sell more products. It's like a cat and mouse game, like cybersecurity in general.