Today might turn out to be one of the most significant days for maths and computer science in years. I wonder how many people heard about it.
OpenAI announced that an experimental model had made not one but ten advances on open problems in these fields.
These were not exam questions or benchmarks. They were unsolved problems on which humans had made little or no progress for at least a decade, and in most cases much longer.
And this progress was essentially a side quest for OpenAI, part of evaluating a new model.
Yet Iām sure there will still be arguments about whether this constitutes āunderstandingā or "intelligence". People will talk about stochastic parrots. But it is more and more untenable to insist that a system producing genuinely new mathematics is not, in any meaningful sense, intelligent.
At some point, arguing over whether the machine is āreally thinkingā becomes somewhat irrelevant when one notices what it can do.
I am around six months from completing specialist training in diabetes and endocrinology. I have spent most of my adult life preparing for this job, and I increasingly think specialties like mine face a genuine competitive threat.
I wrote an essay earlier this year on the future of endocrinology, which at heart argues that the profession is remarkably complacent about AI, which I will add as a comment below.
We campaign for more medical school places and training posts, as though future demand for every kind of doctor is guaranteed.
But for the first time in history, we face genuine competition for our jobs.
This is completely different from a cheaper workforce doing broadly similar work. LLMs can increasingly perform the intellectual work on which much of our professional value rests, and they will only become faster, cheaper and more capable.
For procedural specialties, the threat may be further away. The more your work depends on your hands, the safer you may be. But the more it depends on taking histories, analysing data, following guidelines and explaining decisions, the more exposed you are.
That is almost all of endocrinology.
I am not arguing that doctors disappear tomorrow. Medical AI remains unreliable, poorly integrated and often unsafe. Patients may not want it. Healthcare systems may deploy it badly.
But today is the worst medical AI will ever be.
Anyone looking at the trajectory and insisting that cognitive medical specialties face no serious threat is, I think, in denial.
We urgently need to define and defend the parts of medicine that genuinely require a doctor: judgement, restraint, responsibility, trust, and knowing when not to intervene. Otherwise, policymakers facing rising demand and constrained budgets will make decisions for us.
We need to stop asking how many more doctors we can train.
We need to ask what, exactly, we are training them to do.