andersource

I'm asking people not to be so unkind to other people grieving the (potential) loss of a significant part of their life. "If you cared so much about the problem, you'd be thrilled when a solution is found; since you're not thrilled you must be in it for selfish reasons and deserve to be displaced." You didn't write it, but the comment I replied to pretty much did.

I agree that there's room for optimism, but the conduct and messaging of the AI labs isn't very inspiring in that regard. The feeling I get from it is "we're going to push forward at any cost and make humane considerations only when we can afford to. Which isn't a lot because we've got to be the first to AGI or others will make it first and do it wrong." People then get pushed to the sidelines, many whose work contributed to the feasibility of LLM capabilities in the first place. Free market and such. But then they get criticized when they're upset about it?

Give them space to deal with it and help them find optimism, or at least, don't judge them.

I feel like we're arguing past each other. My point is, it's hard for me to see lack of empathy towards mathematicians (and other professionals) who stand to be displaced by these developments. I know I shouldn't take internet strangers too seriously but, when I read the comments here, I feel like some people have deep resentment for those mathematicians, portraying them as going into math in bad faith or something, and now fighting to keep their ill-gained positions.

> I personally think they’re enough problems left for humanity to solve.

For sure, whether those displaced will be able to get to work on them - and whether it will be as fulfilling as their previous work - is not at all guaranteed.

"The market doesn't owe you to do fulfilling work" Yes, but it costs you nothing to be sympathetic to the individual humans that have to undergo these changes, which can be all shades of scary and sad.

> Of course I am not denying the brutality for those who are right in the middle of finishing something.

And those who worked on a problem for 5 years, trying dozens of approaches, and weren't close to finishing something? People over-fixate on the specific problem. The big picture narrative here is, in the best case, "the way we're going to do math will be completely different", and in the worst case, "we'll need much fewer mathematicians".

> I am optimistic for those who haven’t started, which the video is referring to.

Perhaps. This comment chain is about the other side, the so-called rent seekers.

I don't think you can so easily call for separating them when so many people grew up in an environment that ties economic value and a respectful place in society so strongly.

> So the question remains: is it about solving the problem for humanity? Solving the problem for yourself? Or getting paid?

Say it's a mix, which I think is most likely. They enjoy the problem-solving, like doing something that feels meaningful to humanity, and obviously need to get paid. Now what?

I don't think that's the same. Would you let robots raise your kids if they provably did it better than you?

These people knew someone else could solve the problem. Presumably they figured there'd still be meaningful work for them to do - exploring ramifications, new frontiers opened by the solution. Other problems, at worst. Now it all seems far from guaranteed.

I agree about well-adjustedness, but what do you propose these people do to get paid if the number of researchers with grants reduces significantly? Reskill to something that pays less, they like less, and might be automated too? Can you frankly say this wouldn't be a moral blow to anyone, well-adjustedness and all?

I really don't understand such takes. Extend this to every problem in every profession, which seems to be both the trend and the intent (if still far off), and you vaporise the meaning from a lot of people's lives. Sure, they can find other sources of meaning - assuming having their job automated doesn't leave them constantly scrambling to make a living. This would require major social restructuring that nobody's really talking about.

Many people pursue careers based on the intersection between their interests and what society considers valuable. Being upset when what they chose to spend their lives doing either loses value or changes so much it becomes a wholey different job is understandable, and calling it "rent seeking" is very unfair, in my view.

pumpndumpware. catchy

This is a reference to the "wanna feel old?"-style comics, another recurring xkcd theme, for example [0], [1]. But yes, feeling old sucks.

[0] https://xkcd.com/1393/

[1] https://xkcd.com/1686/

Is there a diagnosis for the tendency to collect diagnostic labels and use them to absolve oneself of responsibility?

On further thought, not sure if this would solve the problem or exacerbate it...

Ah :)

From my (limited) experience the OEIS titles lean strongly to the descriptive side too. But maybe also to avoid ambiguity regarding to which one is it from his sequences?

Hofstadter introduces several sequences in GEB, [0] may be an interesting submission on its own but I was especially captivated by this self-referencing one. Plus a title including both Hofstadter's sequence and a description is too long for HN and I preferred the descriptive one

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hofstadter_sequence