@tetsuoai: You can't engineer luck. Cleanest phrasing of P vs NP I've heard. NP is the magical computer that always tells you whic…
Summary
A social media post explaining the P vs NP problem by comparing NP to a 'magical computer' that always finds the right path, referencing MIT's Introduction to Algorithms course.
View Cached Full Text
Cached at: 05/11/26, 02:34 AM
You can’t engineer luck.
Cleanest phrasing of P vs NP I’ve heard.
NP is the magical computer that always tells you which path to take. P is what current silicon can do. Tetris is NP-complete. Chess is EXP-complete.
MIT 6.006 Introduction to Algorithms, Fall 2011. https://t.co/qUqLRWn2i0
Similar Articles
@paul_cal: P = NP + AI
A social media post claims the Jacobian conjecture is false, providing a specific mathematical function as a counterexample.
@ryanlpeterman: Gödel Prize Winner contrarian take on P vs NP: "My point is that we really don't understand polynomial time computation…
Gödel Prize winner Ryan Williams offers a contrarian view on P vs NP, arguing that our understanding of polynomial time computation is still shallow and full of surprises, putting his confidence in P≠NP at 80%.
@_maxfeldman: Rumor is P = NP, specifically there is a promising route to 3-SAT in O(n^{808017424794512875886459904961710757005754368…
A rumor suggests that P = NP, with a claimed approach to solve 3-SAT in O(n^{extremely large number}) time, which appears implausible or humorous.
Implications if P-NP problem is solved?
The article discusses the potential short and long-term implications if the P vs NP problem is solved constructively, with organizations like OpenAI and Anthropic reportedly working on it, and invites insights from experts in mathematics and theoretical computer science.
@krishnanrohit: Interesting intuition but unsurprisingly you cannot say this either in mathematics or code https://x.com/fchollet/statu…
A social media discussion debating the mathematical or codifiable nature of an intuition proposed by François Chollet.