skybrian's recent activity
-
Comment on OpenAI releases findings on 377 math problems, further roiling field in ~science
-
Comment on What programming/technical projects have you been working on? in ~comp
-
Comment on The mathocalypse in ~science
skybrian LinkFrom the article: [...] [...] [...]From the article:
Last night my 9-year-old son was taunting my wife, complexity theorist Dana Moshkovitz, as follows: “mommy, I heard you got cooked! I heard that a robot solved the math problem you worked on for your whole career! OOF!”
While my son was being a brat, he also wasn’t wrong. Whether you’re thrilled, depressed, angry, or whatever else about it, yesterday was surely one of the biggest days in mathematical history. And yes, among the 372 huge results released yesterday by OpenAI, on the recommendation of its advisory group of Timothy Gowers, Edward Witten, and other distinguished mathematicians, was a proof of Subhash Khot’s Unique Games Conjecture (UGC), a statement that my wife has worked toward proving for the entire time I’ve known her. (The UGC implies that a whole slew of optimization problems really are NP-hard, even if you just want an approximation that’s slightly better than what you get from semidefinite programming relaxation, which is one of our main tools.)
Or at least, we’re pretty sure that it’s a proof! There’s a Lean certificate, as there are for some of the other 372 breakthrough results (not all of them). But it also appears that no human has understood just about any of these proofs yet; the race to do so has just started. If you want an on-the-ground sense of what that race is going to be like, here’s some of what Dana texted me last night:
It feels like something written by someone who’s on psychedelics. So much unclear and doesn’t make sense. Lots of name dropping of previous work without discussing why it can be used despite impossibility results
Basically the paper is so horribly written that it’s impossible to read it without AI help
I asked Astra for reasonable completeness and soundness claims of the noise gadget and it gave them by combining claims from all over the paper
[...]
The citations are often irrelevant and confusing
A possible future is a math world that’s heavenly if you have vision/creative ideas that AI could help check and implement.
And of course there’s a lot for us to learn from the aliens
If you’re wondering what emotions Dana is feeling—well, probably all of them! Even while a central career aspiration has fallen to a robot, there are at least two mitigating factors for her. First, she can feel vindicated that the UGC was true after all, something she never doubted even while many of her colleagues did! Second, all of us in math and theoretical computer science and mathematical physics, at least those who cared about solving crisply-stated problems, are now in the same boat.
[...]
These have emerged as the two main models for communicating AI math breakthroughs, and they both have strengths and weaknesses. The “OpenAI model” sets up a crazy race among humans to digest and explain a messy AI proof (work that could easily be some combination of thankless, barely-credited, competitive, and unfun), while the “Anthropic model” puts a private company in the position of picking and choosing which human mathematicians get to be the emissaries of the AI. Dunno, what do you guys think?
For those who are wondering: apparently, the AI model that produced all these wonders was not bespoke contraption of 10,000 agents burning millions of dollars worth of compute, as was used for example to construct a finite-time blowup for the Navier-Stokes equations. Instead, it was simply the latest internal OpenAI model—one that might be released to paying ChatGPT customers within the next couple of months, depending on the recommendations of OpenAI’s safety board! (My 9-year-old son: “Oh they definitely shouldn’t release that. If it could solve all those math problems, it can’t possibly be safe.”) Apparently they used about 3 hours of GPT-Pro level compute on average per problem solved.
Also, if you were wondering: apparently they tried the model on about 8,000 problems. So, right now it “merely” solves ~5% of the longstanding open mathematical problems that it’s asked about, the problems that whole communities have spent years on, after a single 3-hour attempt on them.
[...]
If you want some sense of what things feel like now in math, imagine a hunter-gatherer who’s spent his entire life learning to survive deep in an unforgiving rainforest, then a giant resort hotel springs up right next to him with a helipad and heated pools and AirBnBs, and without missing a beat, the hunter-gatherer says: “alright fine, so now my new job is to run wilderness retreats for the tourists, or something.”
-
The mathocalypse
10 votes -
Comment on OpenAI releases findings on 377 math problems, further roiling field in ~science
skybrian Link ParentI have no independent information. It's based on what actual mathematicians are saying. They are worried and expect that if mathematics survives, it will be entirely different. Is AI the End of...I have no independent information. It's based on what actual mathematicians are saying. They are worried and expect that if mathematics survives, it will be entirely different.
Is AI the End of Math As We Know It?
“In whatever years I have left, I don’t expect that I’ll ever again prove a theorem because I’m actually needed to prove it,” Scott Aaronson of the University of Texas, Austin wrote on his blog. “Human mathematicians are forevermore dethroned as the main theorem-proving entities on planet earth.” Other online missives expressed optimism, but many revealed some combination of grief, confusion, and fear.
...
Two days after the announcement, I found myself in a classroom at the University of California, Berkeley, surrounded by some 150 students, postdocs, and professors. The mathematician Ken Ono, who took a leave of absence from the University of Virginia to work at an AI start-up called Axiom Math, was scheduled to give a talk. “You might be graduating into a profession that might not even exist, or that will be very different than what you expected,” Ono told them. “You need to brace.”
The audience responded with anger and frustration. There were whispers and exchanged glances; Ono couldn’t make it through a single slide without a fresh wave of questions. “I’m not entirely sure what our takeaway is supposed to be,” one student said. Another asked how Ono and his start-up would take responsibility in light of “the shameful way that AI companies are treating mathematics.”
-
Comment on What programming/technical projects have you been working on? in ~comp
skybrian LinkI used a coding agent to build a website that I plan to use instead of GitHub gists. I'm using it mostly as a way to post charts and images. The motivation is that I got tired of using cut and...I used a coding agent to build a website that I plan to use instead of GitHub gists. I'm using it mostly as a way to post charts and images. The motivation is that I got tired of using cut and paste to copy HTML from ChatGPT to a gist, so now the AI can do a push instead.
It's a static website on Netlify, which automatically deploys updates when the git repo changes. I have a preview website in a Linux VM on exe.com and ask the AI to push to GitHub when a new page is ready.
It's boring technology and an overly-elaborate way to publish five web pages. I wouldn't have bothered if it weren't easy to do with AI.
Maybe it will evolve into a blog or something.
-
Comment on OpenAI releases findings on 377 math problems, further roiling field in ~science
skybrian (edited )Link ParentThis math is beyond any of us. They are problems we’ve never heard of before and we’re trusting mathematicians to tell us their significance. The results haven’t been verified but mathematicians...This math is beyond any of us. They are problems we’ve never heard of before and we’re trusting mathematicians to tell us their significance. The results haven’t been verified but mathematicians are taking them seriously.
So this “oh they’re stealing it” just seems like cope. It’s time to admit that AI is better at grinding out theorems than people are. Certainly better than all of us, probably better than nearly all mathematicians, and if it’s not quite better than every mathematician, it’s just a matter of time. Compare with what happened with chess and Go.
-
Comment on OpenAI releases findings on 377 math problems, further roiling field in ~science
skybrian LinkApparently the most important result is a proof of the "Unique Games Conjecture." Here's a 2011 article about it. To me it sounds like a good name for a band, but what do I know?Apparently the most important result is a proof of the "Unique Games Conjecture." Here's a 2011 article about it.
To me it sounds like a good name for a band, but what do I know?
-
Comment on OpenAI releases findings on 377 math problems, further roiling field in ~science
skybrian LinkFrom the article: [...]From the article:
On Tuesday, OpenAI deluged mathematicians with hundreds of new findings that span a wide swath of topics including algebra, number theory, theoretical computer science, mathematical logic and topology.
The 377 results follow OpenAI’s announcement last month that it had succeeded in cracking the Navier-Stokes equation — one of the so-called Millennium Problems, which were considered so challenging that a $1 million reward was offered for each solution.
[...]
Like the Navier-Stokes result, the new mathematical solutions used a more advanced A.I. model that has not been released publicly.
-
OpenAI releases findings on 377 math problems, further roiling field
18 votes -
Comment on Hackers obtain counterfeit TLS certificates for Google and other large services in ~tech
skybrian LinkFrom the article: [...] [...]From the article:
The attackers launched a series of attacks on the .gh, .sl, and .as country code top-level domains (ccTLDs) and then modified authoritative DNS records for selected domains within those namespaces. By controlling those DNS records, the attackers were able to pass automated domain control validation checks and obtain unauthorized certificates for “several Google domains” and “several leading global brands and widely used online services.” Google said it updated Chrome to block all certificates it identified as unauthorized, and worked with the issuing certification authorities to ensure the unauthorized certificates for Google properties were revoked.
[...]
Google didn’t identify the affected domains it owns or name any of the other organizations whose domains were affected. While noting that Chrome users do not need to take any action to be protected, Google cautioned domain owners not to rely solely on browser-side interventions to protect their users. The company is advising domain owners to monitor certificate transparency logs for unexpected certificate issuance across their domains and to publish restrictive Certification Authority Authorization DNS records to prevent attackers from reusing cached validation data after DNS control is restored.
“While Chrome took steps during these incidents to identify and block suspected unauthorized certificates across the affected ccTLDs, browser-side intervention should not be relied on to protect your users,” Google said. “Due to the complexity of DNS hijacks, we cannot guarantee that our analysis identified every affected domain, nor do Chrome interventions reliably protect non-Chrome users.”
[...]
Google noted that the incident didn’t involve the compromise of the infrastructure of any of the affected domain owners and that certificate authorities followed all requirements. With control of the three ccTLDs, the attackers were able to change the IP addresses of a selected list of websites. With the ability to send and receive traffic on those sites, the attackers were able to modify authoritative DNS records and nameserver delegations for selected domains, allowing them to pass industry validation checks requiring an applicant to prove control of the domain.
-
Hackers obtain counterfeit TLS certificates for Google and other large services
32 votes -
Comment on Protests spread across France, growing from school demonstrations (gifted link) in ~society
skybrian Link ParentI don't know how much this will help, but it seems relevant that as the result of running a trade surplus for many years, Japanese investors own a lot of foreign assets, and as the yen drops, they...I don't know how much this will help, but it seems relevant that as the result of running a trade surplus for many years, Japanese investors own a lot of foreign assets, and as the yen drops, they become more valuable (in yen):
https://pages.skybrian.com/2026/japanese-financial-assets-abroad/
-
Comment on Protests spread across France, growing from school demonstrations (gifted link) in ~society
skybrian Link ParentSome of the demands don't sound very expensive, though. A government website that works? I've read that there has been an impressive build-out of public transportation near Paris. Is that winding...Some of the demands don't sound very expensive, though. A government website that works?
I've read that there has been an impressive build-out of public transportation near Paris. Is that winding down?
-
Comment on Productivity tools on MacOS in ~tech
skybrian LinkMacs come with a lot of pretty decent apps, so I wouldn’t say there’s anything that’s a must-have. I install Chrome first thing because it’s what I’m used to, but Safari is decent. Since there’s...Macs come with a lot of pretty decent apps, so I wouldn’t say there’s anything that’s a must-have. I install Chrome first thing because it’s what I’m used to, but Safari is decent.
Since there’s more horizontal than vertical space, I move the dock to the right side.
-
Comment on Do you know the effects of using clickbait to combat misinformation? in ~science
skybrian LinkIt’s a narrow finding: some kinds of headlines get more clicks. From the article:It’s a narrow finding: some kinds of headlines get more clicks. From the article:
Our findings suggest communication style can help attract attention to reliable information.
They don’t show that we changed anyone’s mind. We don’t know whether people read the linked pages, and Facebook’s delivery system influenced who saw each advertisement.
-
Comment on Blue-collar effective altruism in ~society
skybrian Link ParentI think there can be good reasons to get personally involved in local causes, such as being better connected to a local community you care about. There is more to life than being an absentee...I think there can be good reasons to get personally involved in local causes, such as being better connected to a local community you care about. There is more to life than being an absentee source of funding.
The way I plan to resolve that is by having a budget for disinterested global giving (helping people on the basis that everyone is equal) and doing other things, too.
-
Comment on Blue-collar effective altruism in ~society
skybrian (edited )LinkGiveWell is fine if global public health is what you care about. It’s what I use. It’s old school EA before people got distracted by animal welfare and AI. If you don’t care who in the world...GiveWell is fine if global public health is what you care about. It’s what I use. It’s old school EA before people got distracted by animal welfare and AI.
If you don’t care who in the world benefits because all people are equal (all strangers are the same), public health in Africa is going to win for cost-efficiency reasons. A lot of people can be helped for relatively little money. It can save lives. What local organization could do that cheaply?
But the benefits are rather abstract. When people benefit from not getting a disease, they won’t know it. It’s a line on a graph going down, and your contribution is too small to see on the graph, but you can do a calculation to get a rough idea of lives saved. So, it’s a matter of trusting the science. Which I do, but… it’s a rather abstract reason to spend your money.
If you want something a bit less abstract, you could try GiveDirectly. This is just giving money to people in need. A nice thing about it is that people will definitely know they got the money, and it empowers them to spend it on what they like. There are studies showing they mostly spend it on beneficial things. It’s not as efficient as public health, but it’s a good baseline. GiveDirectly also lets you choose to donate to help people in the US if that’s what you prefer.
Neither of these is helping a particular cause, though. I’m interested in that too, but don’t have anything to recommend.
-
Comment on Blocking of unverified apps on Android starts in Brazil and other three countries in ~tech
skybrian Link ParentIf you distrust the official reasons, that's certainly understandable. But it doesn't follow that whatever alternative reasons you or other people make up are what they're thinking. It means their...If you distrust the official reasons, that's certainly understandable. But it doesn't follow that whatever alternative reasons you or other people make up are what they're thinking. It means their true motivations are a mystery. To do better than that, we would need some other way of knowing what they're really thinking, like maybe a leak to the press. Anything else is just speculation.
-
Comment on Blocking of unverified apps on Android starts in Brazil and other three countries in ~tech
skybrian Link ParentI'm reminded of how Bluesky is setting up an independent Swiss organization (blog), that will maintain a public directory of AT Proto users. It's deliberately narrow-scoped, though. It's a...I'm reminded of how Bluesky is setting up an independent Swiss organization (blog), that will maintain a public directory of AT Proto users.
It's deliberately narrow-scoped, though. It's a distribution mechanism that doesn't hold any user keys.
Such a thing might, in principle, be done for Android developers, but Google is doing more work there, by actually checking government IDs. By contrast, there's essentially no barrier to creating as many alt accounts you want on Bluesky.
Oh, I agree that when it comes to programming, it will often do crazy things if given half a chance.
But I think there some problems where you have to try AI, because it only has to be right once, and what if it finds something? For example, scanning for security bugs. If you don't scan for security bugs and fix them, someone else will use AI to find the bugs instead.
And it seems like proving mathematical theorems might be an "it only has to be right once" kind of problem? The failed attempts get thrown out. If there's decent chance of success, it can just keep trying until it gets it.
And like with other tools you might use, a human often has to interpret the results.