{"id":438,"date":"2026-10-21T13:08:56","date_gmt":"2026-10-21T11:08:56","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/blogs.ethz.ch\/sirawit\/?p=438"},"modified":"2026-10-21T13:08:56","modified_gmt":"2026-10-21T11:08:56","slug":"math-2-1-a-rant","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blogs.ethz.ch\/sirawit\/math-2-1-a-rant\/","title":{"rendered":"Math 2.1 \u2013 A Rant"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

I’m extremely annoyed by the community response to this post<\/a>, and my comments there seem to not be helping me (i.e. it seems like no one is convinced). So I’m here writing my own post (rant) in my own blog.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

First, I don’t like people who came into mathematics just because they want to solve problems or build theories. This isn’t meant to be personal, but it should be interpreted institutionally, that is, I don’t think it’s fair to institutionally recognize mathematics as some place where people could gain money, recognition, or fame. If some people were to get money, recognition, or fame, by chance, then let them. I’m not against this, but I’m against anchoring the meaning (and membership) of mathematics to this. I’ve already written my personal opinion and my own proposal to how my dream institutions would be<\/a>. Take it or leave it (or comment for additional suggestions).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Second, I urge people who wish to leave to just leave, and I urge people who wish to stay to just stay. It’s fair for people who grieve and wish to leave to complain. They did not sign up for this. It is, however, annoying for me to see the community trying to pull back these people to stop them from leaving, while providing little support to people who wish to stay. As before, you may interpret this as my own excuse for being a sore loser, but I do believe I have the rights to complain, even if as a loser.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

ChatGPT made a summary of my position, and I think the summary is even better than what I tried to explain, so please take a look:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Since I’ve already proposed what my dream institution would look like, in this post, I’m rather aiming to propose my alternative vision for how I think the mathematics community should adapt, before even approaching my dream institution. I’m saying this both because I truly oppose sticking to Math 1.0<\/em> and I truly think Math 2.0 is not enough for the pace of the current progress<\/em>. Therefore this is my Math 2.1 proposal, and again, take it or leave it, as you wish.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

What are the problems of Math 2.0 (in my opinion)?<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

I like the concept of Math 2.0 very much. It’s an attempt to align AI to improve human understanding of mathematics. And the pursuit is good, legit, and all that.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

But the problem is that I think it’s nearsighted. Not in Terence Tao’s vision, but in what I’ve observed in this post and its comments<\/a>. We say that mathematicians will become curators and managers who orchestrate AI swarms to find proofs. This, in my opinion, is very unstable<\/em>. What if one day AI become better at orchestrating itself? What if one day AI become better at giving expositions and talks?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

We need a better version of Math 2.0. I nicknamed it Math 2.1. As I’ve repeatedly advocated, this current revision of the culture of mathematics must at least be robust to adversarial “attacks” or slopdrops from AI. I don’t think Math 2.0 is enough. I also don’t think the community is doing well enough, as I still see most of the comments online coping over the change and still longing for the good old days when today it’s already way past that point.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

My Rant<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Progress will not be undone. AI is not going to unalive itself. Get over it. If you cry for a day I think it’s reasonable. If you cry for a week, or a month, I think you’re having some emotional problems. Here I propose two solutions that sounds doable to me:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    \n
  1. Live with it, develop Math 2.0, and prepare for Math 2.1.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
  2. Still cling onto Math 1.0, and try to oppose AI.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n

    Even in the second solution, I do not think it is possible to just go and enforce the norms saying that AI companies should stop invading mathematics<\/em>. I think the only way forward is through the political and legal process\u2014if you really think AI is doing more harm than good, and you really think your voices are important, then you should convince the general public to impose a kind of AI tax or legal power over AI companies, not screaming out loud in the internet that AI is bad or whatever\u2014it doesn’t look good on you and you look like some old people who can’t process the advancement of technologies. Not respectable at all.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    For me personally I go with the first solution. I advocate for mathematics to live with AI peacefully. For that to be done, I need you to give up some of your loss<\/em>. Yes, this is a real loss, and I’m not denying it. Perhaps you did not sign up for this. But this is how it is right now. Can you stop crying and do whatever you can to live on? It’s annoying like seeing a baby cry on an airplane. I think anyone that can read my message is at least old enough to understand that I ask you to stop crying, and is old enough to really stop crying and go find a solution.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    You did not sign up for this. I did not sign up for this. But today it is what it is. And you wish to withdraw from the contract, that’s fine (and please go). I wish to sign up for the upcoming Math 2.0 (and please let me stay). Stop trying to enforce everyone to cling to Math 1.0. You’re not the god of this world. If OpenAI stops doing math, others will do it anyway.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    What do I require out of Math 2.1?<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

    Abolish all measures of research. Papers, books, and even expositions<\/em> should not be counted as something to celebrate. In fact, celebrate only the human understanding of mathematics<\/em>. I wish to live in a culture where I’m celebrated when an idea is illuminated, or when my understanding of a proof is checked to be correct. If you celebrate expositions, Math 2.0 will fail at the day AI do better than humans at expositions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    We should stop these kinds of measurements. It is a good time now to do this. Even if you don’t subscribe to my dream institution idea, I still strongly urge the community to abolish this absurd meritocracy.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Math 2.1 should be robust to potentially infinitely better AI capabilities. Whatever measure you wish to measure, you should assume that AI can do it better than you at it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    By the way, I think this post of nihilunbounded<\/a> summarizes the historical advancements of AI pretty well, and I think many mathematicians haven’t really followed the news. The signals are months ago already, and by extrapolation I can predict that Math 2.0 will fail in the next few months. This is why we should adopt a better protocol. Even if you disagree with my proposal of Math 2.1, I urge you to come up with a coherent proposal that can survive this scenario.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    \n

    Prediction (AGI):<\/strong> For sufficiently large \"t\", at time \"t\", for whatever measurable quantity \"X\" humans wish to measure, AI will be able to do \"X\" at a better efficiency, using cheaper economic resources, and also providing a better result than humans.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

    My Position<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

    Among the comments online, I think my position is the closest to one of Daniel Litt and one of Richard Borcherds. In particular I like the following comment very much:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    \"\"
    UC Berkeley math community left at crossroads in wake of OpenAI Navier-Stokes proof | Academics | dailycal.org<\/a><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

    And I also like the following picture very much:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    \"\"
    The Artificial Intelligence Revolution: Part 1 – Wait But Why<\/a><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

    I’m annoyed by the people who can’t accept that they’re dumb. Because I am extremely dumb. And I think I deserve the chance to go and study mathematics, even at this age where AI can do everything better than me! (I even wrote this in my website)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    \"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

    And if not, I’ll just leave, go home, and read some books on my own, perhaps with an AI assistant as the “PhD advisor” for myself.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

    I’m extremely annoyed by the community response to this post, and my comments there seem to not be helping me (i.e. it seems like no one is convinced). So I’m here writing my own post (rant) in my own blog. First, I don’t like people who came into mathematics just because they want to solve […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":49160,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_feature_clip_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-438","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized"],"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ethz.ch\/sirawit\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/438","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ethz.ch\/sirawit\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ethz.ch\/sirawit\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ethz.ch\/sirawit\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/49160"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ethz.ch\/sirawit\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=438"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ethz.ch\/sirawit\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/438\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":444,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ethz.ch\/sirawit\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/438\/revisions\/444"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ethz.ch\/sirawit\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=438"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ethz.ch\/sirawit\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=438"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ethz.ch\/sirawit\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=438"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}