I’m not an AI techie and I’m not well educated on LLMs/AI in general. The issue I’m having is the dichotomy between how people talk about it. I’ve heard completely opposite ends of the spectrum. From AI is quickly becoming advanced enough to threaten human society, all the way to its a glorified dictionary/search engine that can’t really do much of anything. I know Lemmy has a steep anti-AI slant. But, can someone talk about this in a way I can wrap my head around why the divide seems so big?
I think a big unknown right now, would be how many Millennium Problems are new GenAI techniques able to bruteforce with existing mathematical techniques/theories?
We just saw one massive bruteforce, can we bruteforce any of the Millennium problems related to cryptography? Because then all hell could break lose rather quickly
Cryptographic theory says: no. The whole basis of cryptographic security is that brute forcing doesn’t work (in any reasonable timeframe.)
Theories are overturned, from time to time.
Quantum computing + AI = ?
Strangely, I haven’t read a single headline about AI making breakthroughs in Quantum computing… but you know certain players are working in that direction.
Back in the 80s they were teaching that cryptography protected secrets “for a time” and how long they need to be protected dictated how hard you go at the key length and other costs of en/decryption. By the 00s we could easily and quickly run key lengths so hard (for conventional computation) to crack that they were essentially protected “forever” - at least until quantum algorithms shake things up a bit. That’s the next unknown: when Shor’s algorithm will start delivering real world results - like the end of BTC.
That just proves that these tools do not possess any kind of intelligence at all. They’re great at bruteforcing, precisely because it doesn’t require any intelligence. I don’t expect them to solve any of the millenium problems that cannot be brute-forced. In addition, as far as, I know the navier-stokes solution has not been verified yet.