Quant pro: A Millennium-prize AI won't 'solve' markets — it's engine-building, not proofs
iaindunning · x · 2026-08-18
A quant/MM practitioner argues that trading, at least as they practice it, is more like building and operating a complex engine — forecasting, modeling, hard-to-simulate control — than a math/TCS problem; "solving the market" like a proof is the wrong mental model.
Reacting to AI's progress in math, they note a math-genius AI helps here just as math skills help many hard problems, but quant is no more solved by such an AI than building and running a tokamak. The open question they're curious about: when does progress on verifiable problems like proofs spill over to all hard technical problems?
More from AGI Musings
- ServiceTitan cuts off integration, revealing AI's impact on traditional software — ycombinator · 2026-08-18
- Khosla et al. argue in JAMA: autonomous AI care will beat physician-only and hybrid care — jesselyu · 2026-08-18
- Best Argument for Shorter Workweek is Arithmetic, Not Wellbeing — VraserX · 2026-08-18
- Microsoft VP: AI adoption is fundamentally a selective system of survival of the fittest — dfinke · 2026-08-18
- Opinion: The Optimal Profile Requires Core Skills Learned Without AI — connoraxiotes · 2026-08-18
- Why I'm skeptical about the "Internet of Agents" rental market — MelodicCare1216 · 2026-08-18