Lady Butterfly she/her@reddthat.com to Technology@lemmy.worldEnglish · 1 day agoZuckerberg hailed AI ‘superintelligence’. Then his smart glasses failed on stage | Matthew Cantorwww.theguardian.comexternal-linkmessage-square109fedilinkarrow-up1555arrow-down110
arrow-up1545arrow-down1external-linkZuckerberg hailed AI ‘superintelligence’. Then his smart glasses failed on stage | Matthew Cantorwww.theguardian.comLady Butterfly she/her@reddthat.com to Technology@lemmy.worldEnglish · 1 day agomessage-square109fedilink
minus-squareiopq@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1arrow-down3·1 day agoA Math PhD will eventually make a simple arithmetic mistake if you ask them to do enough problems. That doesn’t invalidate more difficult proofs they have published in papers
minus-squareUnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up6·1 day ago A Math PhD will eventually make a simple arithmetic mistake if you ask them to do enough problems. Which is why we don’t designate a single Math PhD as a definitive source for all mathematical wisdom. That doesn’t invalidate more difficult proofs If I’m handed a proof with a simple arithmetic mistake in the logic, that absolutely invalidates it
minus-squareiopq@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1arrow-down1·17 hours agoBut you didn’t say that. You said you can’t trust something that makes basic mistakes. Humans make them all the time. You can’t trust any human?
minus-squareUnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up2·9 hours agoBeginning to think I’m arguing with a bot
minus-squareiopq@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1·1 hour agoYou said Imagine a calculator that reported “1+1=3”. It seems silly to use such a machine to do long division. Every single person alive has made silly addition mistakes. Is it silly to trust those people with long division?
A Math PhD will eventually make a simple arithmetic mistake if you ask them to do enough problems. That doesn’t invalidate more difficult proofs they have published in papers
Which is why we don’t designate a single Math PhD as a definitive source for all mathematical wisdom.
If I’m handed a proof with a simple arithmetic mistake in the logic, that absolutely invalidates it
But you didn’t say that. You said you can’t trust something that makes basic mistakes. Humans make them all the time. You can’t trust any human?
Beginning to think I’m arguing with a bot
You said
Every single person alive has made silly addition mistakes. Is it silly to trust those people with long division?