To transfer that to AI in private hands seems a bit crazy, but what do I know? I think funding bodies will stay the course in the short term before bending to some behind closed doors persuasion to feed the AI machine.

If only pure math were a source of riches, that might work out well for them.

I have a book on mathematical cranks where that seems to be the common delusion, that if only you solve some open problems then fame and fortune must surely follow.

But moving forward the goal should remain that writing should be comprehensible and not overly reliant on templates and other annoyances.

[edit] some good disagreements here which I appreciate. Thanks! I am continuing to think about this.

I say this because you could make monetary contributions illegal and lobbying would still be legal and ethical. We talk about campaign contributions as a separate issue and they have been treated in the courts separately.

I agree that putting strict limits on campaign finance is an important battle that is still ahead of us.

Campaign finance is [currently] corrupt. But it doesn’t have to be that way.

There is an ongoing argument in the US that a person was elected, therefore everything they do after that has the blessing of the electorate. Funny thing though, the people don’t really have a crystal ball to see into the future how their elected official will decide betray the country in the name of a “mandate”.

Counter productive and dumb, although not dumb from the viewpoint of an AI company trying to win hearts and minds hoping that translates into revenue.

Lots of mathematical problems require WORK, and now we have a homunculus to do the work. Indeed most AI companies are oriented toward brute forcing every way forward in order to claim the prize of being profitable.

This could genuinely serve the purpose of mathematical understanding for humanity, but in the short run it is a series of stunts. In the long run I am optimistic that we will benefit.

It’s not organized like a human brain, it shouldn’t be surprising that unusual results occur. They are approximating human intelligence from a different angle. It’s interesting to see the improvements in areas like this that require introspection that isn’t fully wired up yet.

[edit] I should add that a human making a New Yorker cartoon is extremely iterative and introspective. Current generative AI is meant to push it out, and you can do the iteration and introspection yourself.

So image to text, then a brute force attack on a Napoleonic era cypher.

Then the AI companies have more confidence that they can move forward in a certain way, and issue investor guidance that is maybe closer to reality.