2 ms·

what reason do we have to believe that they did this? both things were proved by AI, isn't it logical that they could have very similar approaches? it is commo

what reason do we have to believe that they did this? both things were proved by AI, isn't it logical that they could have very similar approaches? it is common that multiple people essentially simultaneously prove/invent the same thing I see zero evidence of wrongdoing

j16sdiz 18d ago
This depends on what "proved by AI" meant. Was that a one shot prompt? or something guided by human, step by step? If that's the later, it won't use the same approach when not guided by the same human.
- efavdb 17d ago
  Apparently Tristan was working on this problem for years, with AI providing help. Vs OpenAI spending a week with their new model, potentially having access to Tristan’s work.
rakejake 17d ago
OAI started working on this only after they found out it was close to being solved. They threw a team of researchers who spent sleepless nights + a ton of compute. This is not exactly healthy academic competition - it's like if you spend a year hunting for oil fields and finally find a very promising area to be explored, only to find that Exxon tapped their entire exploration unit to go all in and and find it overnight just to stake claim to the discovery. Tao said it right - math should not be treated as a non-renewable resource to be mined.
- spongebobstoes 17d ago
  that is not related to the accusation that they literally stole Buckmaster's work, which seems baseless I don't agree with the oil claim analogy. this is knowledge, freely given to the world. not something hoarded by a corporation
  - JumpCrisscross 17d ago
    > this is knowledge, freely given to the world Even if you’re starting from a position that credit for a discovery literally can’t be stolen, that still doesn’t resolve in OpenAI’s favor here.
    - spongebobstoes 17d ago
      it seems like OAI tried to share, but didn't want to share with an Ant employee. a bit childish, but understandable to want to avoid a headline "Anthropic researcher solves Millennium problem" it seems like Buckmaster got one-upped and is upset. understandable, but I find their reaction childish as well
      - JumpCrisscross 17d ago
        > OAI tried to share, but didn't want to share with an Ant employee Why does OpenAI get to dictate who Buckmaster can claim co-authorship with? > I find their reaction childish OpenAI may have, with full plausible deniability, taken Buckmaster’s work and passed it off—in substantial part—as their own. (Fitting into a fact pattern of them having tried to do the same with Apple.) There is a material takeaway for anyone who does creative or otherwise unique work from this. (Which is unfortunate. Whatever happened here, AI clearly accelerated the discovery process.) For anyone else, I agree it’s just drama.
        spongebobstoes 17d ago
        OAI didn't try to claim Buckmaster's work as their own. OAI tried to let Buckmaster present OAI's work. it is nearly the opposite of your accusation
        oliculipolicula 17d ago
        More like OAI needed someone like Buckmaster's stamp of approval. They know they can't get Tao's. Now they won't be able to get Zoroa's. You have to hope the rest of the guys they didn't know to cite will readily give up honour and dignity https://www.reddit.com/r/mathematics/comments/1wauync/comment/p8l7kmj/ https://www.reddit.com/r/mathematics/comments/1wauync/commen... It doesn't seem like there's anyone at OAI who knows much about the problem they are solving. Seems like CS theorists or algebraists* trying to own the pros by driving a car that's beyond their skill level. For one, they didn't cite the guys that B&A based their work on. *It would be most fair to say there are no analysts on board, nor are they likely hire any soon; those are the least impressionable people in math. Applied math PDE elves who hadn't already left on the world-model boats would have jumped off around the time that eg Ilya did because they wouldnt have been able to stand the three Bs pretending to be experts in fields they imagine to be "adjacent".. like Public Relations
JumpCrisscross 17d ago
> what reason do we have to believe that they did this? The culture at OpenAI being systematically revealed by Apple’s lawsuit, for one.

j16sdiz 18d ago

This depends on what "proved by AI" meant. Was that a one shot prompt? or something guided by human, step by step? If that's the later, it won't use the same approach when not guided by the same human.

efavdb 17d ago
Apparently Tristan was working on this problem for years, with AI providing help. Vs OpenAI spending a week with their new model, potentially having access to Tristan’s work.

rakejake 17d ago

OAI started working on this only after they found out it was close to being solved. They threw a team of researchers who spent sleepless nights + a ton of compute. This is not exactly healthy academic competition - it's like if you spend a year hunting for oil fields and finally find a very promising area to be explored, only to find that Exxon tapped their entire exploration unit to go all in and and find it overnight just to stake claim to the discovery. Tao said it right - math should not be treated as a non-renewable resource to be mined.

spongebobstoes 17d ago
that is not related to the accusation that they literally stole Buckmaster's work, which seems baseless I don't agree with the oil claim analogy. this is knowledge, freely given to the world. not something hoarded by a corporation
- JumpCrisscross 17d ago
  > this is knowledge, freely given to the world Even if you’re starting from a position that credit for a discovery literally can’t be stolen, that still doesn’t resolve in OpenAI’s favor here.
  - spongebobstoes 17d ago
    it seems like OAI tried to share, but didn't want to share with an Ant employee. a bit childish, but understandable to want to avoid a headline "Anthropic researcher solves Millennium problem" it seems like Buckmaster got one-upped and is upset. understandable, but I find their reaction childish as well
    - JumpCrisscross 17d ago
      > OAI tried to share, but didn't want to share with an Ant employee Why does OpenAI get to dictate who Buckmaster can claim co-authorship with? > I find their reaction childish OpenAI may have, with full plausible deniability, taken Buckmaster’s work and passed it off—in substantial part—as their own. (Fitting into a fact pattern of them having tried to do the same with Apple.) There is a material takeaway for anyone who does creative or otherwise unique work from this. (Which is unfortunate. Whatever happened here, AI clearly accelerated the discovery process.) For anyone else, I agree it’s just drama.
      - spongebobstoes 17d ago
        OAI didn't try to claim Buckmaster's work as their own. OAI tried to let Buckmaster present OAI's work. it is nearly the opposite of your accusation
        oliculipolicula 17d ago
        More like OAI needed someone like Buckmaster's stamp of approval. They know they can't get Tao's. Now they won't be able to get Zoroa's. You have to hope the rest of the guys they didn't know to cite will readily give up honour and dignity https://www.reddit.com/r/mathematics/comments/1wauync/comment/p8l7kmj/ https://www.reddit.com/r/mathematics/comments/1wauync/commen... It doesn't seem like there's anyone at OAI who knows much about the problem they are solving. Seems like CS theorists or algebraists* trying to own the pros by driving a car that's beyond their skill level. For one, they didn't cite the guys that B&A based their work on. *It would be most fair to say there are no analysts on board, nor are they likely hire any soon; those are the least impressionable people in math. Applied math PDE elves who hadn't already left on the world-model boats would have jumped off around the time that eg Ilya did because they wouldnt have been able to stand the three Bs pretending to be experts in fields they imagine to be "adjacent".. like Public Relations

JumpCrisscross 17d ago

> what reason do we have to believe that they did this? The culture at OpenAI being systematically revealed by Apple’s lawsuit, for one.