Solving Famous Problems Isn't a Qualitative Leap
teortaxesTex · x · 2026-07-15
This post reinforces a broader perspective: there is no absolute, qualitative boundary between math/proof problems of varying difficulties. The author argues that "solving a famous problem for the first time" is often more of a PR event than a fundamental leap in capability.
They also express a specific stance: if DeepSeek achieves a genuine "first success" on a named problem, it would be far more convincing. Ultimately, however, they believe such progress should be viewed on a continuum rather than being mythologized as a singular breakthrough.
More from AGI Musings
- US senator slams AI industry for proposing 50-death threshold for 'catastrophic incident' — peterwildeford · 2026-10-27
- Understanding the AI consciousness debate: which theory of mind is behind it — msharmas · 2026-10-27
- Functionalism: if consciousness is just what the brain computes, silicon can run it too — msharmas · 2026-10-27
- iPhone case with 85,000 reviews in days: everything fake in the age of abundance — tekbog · 2026-10-27
- Whether AI can be conscious depends on your definition: five frameworks for thinking about it — msharmas · 2026-10-27
- dunkhippo33 Shares How He Thinks About Raising Kids in the AI Era — kimmonismus · 2026-10-27