logoalt Hacker News

chii • today at 6:17 AM • 3 replies • view on HN

usefulness can only be determined after the fact.

People thought, back in the 17 century, that imaginary were useless (except as a trick for some calculations). Turns out the research into these numbers back then is amazingly useful today, 300 years later, in electronics and such.

Publicly funded maths research should continue, even if some taxpayers feel it's a waste of money.


Replies

Chance-Device • today at 6:24 AM

Nobody determined the usefulness of the internal combustion engine or the aeroplane after the fact. They were goals specifically worked towards. For every useful discovery that comes from this hobbyist approach there are far more that aren’t, and those would have been discovered during a goal orientated research program.

However, with AI it actually may become so cheap that the scattergun random approach becomes more viable rather than less. It’s when human time and resources are scarce that you need to optimise. The hobbyist approach may therefore ironically continue, but without the hobbyists.

dataflow • today at 6:49 AM

> Publicly funded maths research should continue, even if some taxpayers feel it's a waste of money.

Note, I think the debate is mainly over what research should be funded, not whether any research should be funded.

➕ show 1 reply
stale2002 • today at 7:01 AM

> usefulness can only be determined after the fact.

Thats great! So in other words it should be perfectly fine for AI to solve all of the supposedly useless math problems so that it might possibly be useful later. No need to worry about the mathematicians hobbies here.

➕ show 1 reply