upvote
it does change the scale of solution from "solved some navier stokes" to "put the cherry on top"

having a result means the math can keep moving forward, and having openai and anthropic train against how mathematicians use their models should let math continue to move faster, and the rest of us get to benefit.

I think these traces however should be public domain and publicly available, since they are basically university work

reply
Good comparison. One is a multi-year claim by people who have been given ample opportunity to provide proof and completely refuse to do, even in courts of law. The other is a potential development in a breaking story.

Oh wait... its not a good comparrison, its an incredibly obvious false equivalence.

Note for the fools: I'm only commenting on the bad faith claim in the comment I'm replying to, not taking a stance on the validity of theft claims. Given the players involved the truth probably some nuanced middle-ground that is worth paying attention to anyway.

reply
Trump claimed they stole the election immediately, and people agreed with him immediately. There's no false equivalence here. He did the same thing in this past election even despite winning.

It's a perfect example of people wanting to believe what they want to believe and ignoring evidence in order to do so.

Currently, there's no evidence. So saying it was stolen has no basis other than typical academic posturing and being a bad sport about "losing the race to the solution". Its happened 1000000 times before in academia and it will continue to happen.

If there's proof of OpenAI malfeasance than I'll happily curse them for it at that time. But until then I won't rely on heresay and vibes.

reply
No, its a pure outrage. I defended OpenAI til today. I now affirm they must be totally destroyed, burned utterly to the ground.
reply
Why the rage?

Weather an individual or a company found the solution (stolen or not) they both used AI to come get the solution.

We have AGI and the intelligence abundance is going to be amazing for everyone in the future.

reply
> Why the rage?

I think it's the dishonesty, the threats of "destroying the career" of one of the mathematicians, and the request that one of the authors disavow *the other individual he was working with for the last 1-2 years* so he could claim the Clay prize as part of OpenAI.

It doesn't surprise me that OpenAI's team were surprised he'd turn it down; it shows that they just assume everyone else is as slimy as they are.

reply
>slimy

I can't put my finger on it, but there's something off about this article, e.g. glossing over the opportunism (acting on "rumors"), drive-by claim about "strict safeguards [...] including monitoring and isolation", high horse attitude (we gave the guy a chance, we don't care about 1M USD, and while you fools are complaining we just tick this box and continue the pursuit of our noble goals for the benefit of humanity). I don't like it.

reply
> We have AGI and the intelligence abundance is going to be amazing for everyone in the future.

Why? These 'geniuses in a datacenter' aren't good, they aren't 'aligned', they don't work for you. They'll take your job, then they'll hack your computer, and then who knows what's next.

reply
I mean it's definitely an outrage, but I find it hard to believe that you went from "yay OpenAI" to "literally destroy the company" over... accusations of academic misconduct?
reply