Birbla

Join the discussion

Write your take first — we'll ask for email only when you're ready to publish.

Sign in
  • Hacker News
  • For the uninitiated, why is this interesting given it doesn't seem to be so much below the threshold?
    by MinimalAction
  • this is perfect for when i have an array of at LEAST 2^118000 items

    i will NEVER care about proposed multiplication speedups unless they are truly generalized

    by 12390asdjkas
  • I love this, entirely separate from any applications or even understanding. It's incredible that we needed this trillion-dollar technology to learn about a faster way to multiply two numbers!

    Math is incredibly rich, and even the simplest things have insanely complicated structure when you zoom in. However this all ends up, math is bigger than LLMs, and the people who claim it is getting "solved" and we are running out of open problems haven't stared into the abyss enough.

    by Kotlopou
  • Is there an associated machine-checked proof of this?

    We're in full vibe-code mode at work, so I understand both how powerful frontier models can be and how often they can over-confidently state subtly (or not so subtly) wrong things, even when you're taking great efforts to try to keep that from happening.

    So without a Lean development or extensive human verification, I guess I'm a little bit skeptical, and even sort of hoping this is wrong - not just because of my not so positive feelings about AI, but by my disposition towards beauty in math. n log n is an awful lot nicer than what we have here.

    by wk_end
  • I wonder if the AI spent extra time on this without being told to
    by binlog
  • I laughed out loud at the n lg n ^ (1 - 2^{-182}). It is so funny.
    by shmoil
  • We shaved a whole: 1/6129982163463555433433388108601236734474956488734408704 off the nlogn
    by TGower

Explore Birbla archives