Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit
Claiming the models are not good at math at this point, especially for things like formalization where w you aren't even breaking new ground, is a very very bold claim to make. So ignoring that point for obvious reasons, why would people rewrite all software?

1. Because everything everywhere is getting hacked

2. For the same reasons people are already decomping games and rebuilding Photoshop and stuff - because they can and don't want to pay for proprietary options.

3. Because of the exact same dynamics of fast fashion? I'm not sure how fast fashion supports your point. Fast fashion is specifically not maintaining old clothes and treating all clothes as disposable slop and rotating through them. That dynamic in software is all software becomes single use throwaway and formalization as a part of the agent loop based on some set of standards is a pretty good way to make that tractable

What do you mean "no new ground"? There is a very narrow, super constrained set of programs that we know how to formalize, some programs we kinda sorta hope we can, and absolutely everything else where we might not even bother. Check out what epic effort it took to prove 5th busy beaver. no visible abvances on collatz conjecture - and those are among simpliest things you can come up with! Any software that embeds similar behaviour is undecidable by construction. Which forces a rewrite to exclude such behaviour. Or, most likely, fabricating proof criteria that are unsound.

What is more likely, for AI agent that is trained with the goal of making user believe their problem is solved to solve exceedingly hard problem by developing novel theory, or to come up with plausible looking fake solution to the problem?

Fast fashion was mentioned as parallel to fast software — no incentives to lose profits.

loading story #50442423
People (humans) have been able to verify 10k-ish line programs so far. I don't think AI has done better yet, but either way it'll probably catch up soon. But getting to the millions or billions of lines of code in real software would be breaking new ground.