2026-09-08 22:58 UTC
@nilesh@fosstodon.org @tao@mathstodon.xyz I understand the argument for that claim as follows:
1) If a mathematician is scooped on a problem, it is hard for them to disseminate their insights and tools.
2) AI can, with sufficient investment, convert a tractable problem into a solution (and thus a scoop).
3) Mathematicians can (only?) avoid being scooped by being secretive about their work.
4) Good open problems are hard to make without an open mathematics community.
(2-3) have just been given a major example, and seem quite plausible. (1) has a long history in the field, no? Plenty of careers ended or interrupted, and several famous and messy fights over priority. I think Tao argues for (4) persuasively.
Replies (1)
-
@nilesh@fosstodon.org 2026-09-08 23:36
@drScott@mathstodon.xyz @tao@mathstodon.xyz I need to ponder more on this. I was reasoning under the scenario where most people have equal access to frontier AI. So, using AI becomes akin to using a calculator or a personal computer. But currently, it's definitely unequal (OpenAI reportedly spent more than $1m for Navier-Stokes), which is where "scooping" becomes possible, and might encourage not sharing promising research directions in the first place.