This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.

Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
Navier-Stokes Millenium Problem Solved by GPT
OpenAI says they solved the Navier-Stokes Millenium Prize problem with an internal model that is more powerful than GPT6, so a GPT 7 candidate or something close. OpenAI has been on fire lately really casting a shadow on Anthropic. First the hugging face incident, now the first to crack the Millenium prize problems.
As for the solution to the problem, they are claiming that smoothness is disproved and that the equations do break down.
They say that the equation can develop a singularity, which apparently means it is not a perfect model.
This is very exciting to me as I believe it to be the first scientific result of an AI model. Previous results have been basically irrelevant to the sciences. However, this result is of course still completely symbolic in nature, which is not surprising because LLMs are not embodied enough to collect data and analyze it autonomously.
While they are generating amazing PR recently, I will say GPT-6 is somewhat disappointing for coding. It is not the same leap that 5.5 to 5.6 sol was. It would appear that the models are getting better at running very long context chains while efficiency improvements and refinements in lower level tasks are lacking. Still, it's great work from OpenAI and it's plausible to me that if there's no singularity in general by 2030, there will be for mathematicians. They will no longer be meaningful for producing math, rather they will only be humans who understand it.
You know what, I'm past caring. At least caring enough to make a fuss about things, or spend my limited time under the untamed sun trying to convince people to see the writing on the wall.
Yeah, we just found a solution to Navier-Stokes. I know just enough to say that that's a Big Deal. It's one of many Big Deals lately, each bigger than the last.
Anyone is welcome to plot the trendlines. I'm going to continue having fun and doing things IRL while that adds anything over what the bots can do. Good luck everyone, make sure to enjoy yourself.
As one of those people who, in your view, refuses to see the writing on the wall, I'm not sure why you would even be worried about my coming over to your side. Even if you could convince me and all the other AI skeptics out there, what, exactly, am I supposed to do with this information?
I am known to have altruistic tendencies. If that isn't enough, I dislike it when people are wrong about things, and find it satisfying to at least try and correct them. Also, there was some scope for coordinating a solution instead of having it imposed on us. Maybe it's not too late.
What are you going to do with this information? Entirely up to you. What would you do with the knowledge we're going to be raptured, or that an asteroid has a 30% chance of hitting the Earth in a few years?
Go to the pub and wait for it all to blow over?
That's what you would do if the asteroid was going to hit in a few hours, not a few years. We need some way to live while we wait, and with uncertainty about whether the asteroid is really going to hit at all.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link