3 ms·

> OAI pushed a button and solved NS Not exactly... From here: https://cims.nyu.edu/~tristanb/statement.pdf https://cims.nyu.edu/~tristanb/statement.pdf "I w

> OAI pushed a button and solved NS Not exactly... From here: https://cims.nyu.edu/~tristanb/statement.pdf https://cims.nyu.edu/~tristanb/statement.pdf "I was shown a prompt and told the internal research model had simply been given the problem statement. Levent had been told by Sebastien “very little human input” had been used. This turned out not to be true. Over the course of the call, as members of their team sent Sebastien corrections and details over their internal chat, it emerged that an entire team had been working on the problem".

sobellian 1mo ago
The evidence we have (not much) leaves the facts severely under-constrained. All the below are consistent with what we observe: - OpenAI lying their face off for marketing purposes - Buckmaster sore about getting beaten to NS, misrepresenting what was told - Buckmaster not being an expert in ML, not understanding what he was told and hearing what he wanted to hear as it vindicated him - Others... OAI claimed that none of the people on their team were domain experts. So it's more akin to Deep Blue than Stockfish (actually slightly better than Deep Blue which did hire domain experts) but nevertheless represents a highly sophisticated automatic theorem prover.