Looks like the 16 year old thanks the Professor for some kind of collaboration, so why does the title make this look like some kind of conflict? This just comes across as unnecessarily demeaning to the Professor.
Although in scientific context disproving doesn't necessarily indicate any conflict. And both the person who postulated something and the person who disproved it might be thankful to each other.
> It's an 18 year old kid talking up their accomplishments two years ago on Twitter.
16-year-old, not 18-year-old. The original work that they disproved with GPT-5.5 was from two years ago, the posted work happened recently. GPT-5.5 did not exist two years ago so the student could not have done this work two years ago without a time machine.
And the submitter to HN is the one that added the "to disprove professor" spin in the title. In the tweet, the student wrote "to disprove this case". Much more neutral language.
Looks like the 16 year old thanks the Professor for some kind of collaboration, so why does the title make this look like some kind of conflict? This just comes across as unnecessarily demeaning to the Professor.
AI culture is about demeaning people so that you can prop ai. You can see it everywhere.
Conflict is a form of collaboration.
Although in scientific context disproving doesn't necessarily indicate any conflict. And both the person who postulated something and the person who disproved it might be thankful to each other.
I don’t recommend going around intentionally making your collaborators looks like fools to an audience that doesn’t know anything about mathematics.
this is what I meant. disproving the conjecture is a form of collaboration, it’s not meant to be demeaning and is not demeaning in mathematics
It's an 18 year old kid talking up their accomplishments two years ago on Twitter.
When I was 18, I also thought I was hot shit. No surprise they're being self-aggrandizing.
> It's an 18 year old kid talking up their accomplishments two years ago on Twitter.
16-year-old, not 18-year-old. The original work that they disproved with GPT-5.5 was from two years ago, the posted work happened recently. GPT-5.5 did not exist two years ago so the student could not have done this work two years ago without a time machine.
And the submitter to HN is the one that added the "to disprove professor" spin in the title. In the tweet, the student wrote "to disprove this case". Much more neutral language.
18 years old are adults.
Legally, perhaps. Behaviourally not so much, in my experience.