Nobody wants to admit just how bad the bot problem is, because it starts to dig into the fact that advertising isn't nearly as effective as advertisers let on
Especially after they committed textbook misconduct by trying to purge one of the paper authors because he worked for a competitor
Because the core of the issue is that it may well not have solved it, but instead plagiarised the significant step of the result from other researchers That's why nobody's talking about how impressive this is, because…
The prompts they put in are the equivalent
"The route to the Clay problem through a smooth force, options c and d in Fefferman’s statement of the problem, is the route Luis and Diego opened and the one Levent and I had quietly chosen to attack. Almost nobody…
OpenAI have admitted their new model they used was trained on prompts at around the time that researcher was working on it, so it seems self evident that it was used as part of the millennium solution
If I stole someone's private research notes and republished them loosely in my own words, they'd correctly be pissed This was unpublished research that was stolen, and constitutes plagiarism and academic fraud by even…
This is the literal opposite of progress: stealing from people genuinely creating, and stealing the money they should earn
We're having to rediscover in real time the extremely hard way, why enabling mass theft is so incredibly damaging to society. This is literally why we need a functional copyright system If theft becomes more profitable…
That doesn't make it fine. We should not excuse this behaviour just because its rampant already, especially when it comes to such a serious prize
This is textbook plagiarism, scooping their result knowing that the research was part of the training data
The biggest issue we aren't talking about is, of course, that those two researchers were not the only two using ChatGPT to work on the problem at the time
I just want to add to this another update by the author as well: https://mastodon.social/@tristanbuckmaster/11723647135247030... Which seems to be very directly accusing OpenAI of plagiarism
I mean, its years worth of hard work by multiple researchers it would seem, which OpenAI simply lifted and claimed as its own. These researchers weren't just letting OpenAI burn tokens while sipping martinis on a beach
OpenAI's T&Cs let them steal your children I'd suspect, that doesn't make it morally correct
The researchers are pretty directly accusing OpenAI of plagiarism https://mastodon.social/@tristanbuckmaster/11723647135247030...
https://mastodon.social/@tristanbuckmaster/11723647135247030... He very much is accusing them of stealing his work
They kind of did though, they were hoping to keep the fact that they may well have plagiarised these researchers unpublished work quiet. They did not want this to turn into a scandal about the fact that they appear to…
Yeah well, its easy to do if you steal someone elses work and then try to threaten them into staying quiet about it
Are you joking? This is evidence that OpenAI is committing plagiarism en masse of researchers private work and threatening them into staying quiet to re-present their results as their own. This would be one of the…
Drama aside, this solution would be a counterexample disproving the smoothness postulate, which means that it leads to nothing new unfortunately. We already had working solutions to navier stokes, the only thing we…
It isn't a priority dispute, the more concerning allegation is that OpenAI may be training their models on prompts that mathematicians were using to solve this problem, and then surprise surprise OpenAI were able to…
>I asked whether the model had been trained on, or had access to, our sessions in Codex, into which we had been putting all our drafts for the whole of this project. I was told the model did not look up user data. I…
Shockingly poor security to let an application have totally unrestricted access to the web with no review, of course this kind of stuff is going to happen
I mean, they've already violated the law in acquiring all their training data already, why would they be uncomfortable violating a contract to get more training data?
Nobody wants to admit just how bad the bot problem is, because it starts to dig into the fact that advertising isn't nearly as effective as advertisers let on
Especially after they committed textbook misconduct by trying to purge one of the paper authors because he worked for a competitor
Because the core of the issue is that it may well not have solved it, but instead plagiarised the significant step of the result from other researchers That's why nobody's talking about how impressive this is, because…
The prompts they put in are the equivalent
"The route to the Clay problem through a smooth force, options c and d in Fefferman’s statement of the problem, is the route Luis and Diego opened and the one Levent and I had quietly chosen to attack. Almost nobody…
OpenAI have admitted their new model they used was trained on prompts at around the time that researcher was working on it, so it seems self evident that it was used as part of the millennium solution
If I stole someone's private research notes and republished them loosely in my own words, they'd correctly be pissed This was unpublished research that was stolen, and constitutes plagiarism and academic fraud by even…
This is the literal opposite of progress: stealing from people genuinely creating, and stealing the money they should earn
We're having to rediscover in real time the extremely hard way, why enabling mass theft is so incredibly damaging to society. This is literally why we need a functional copyright system If theft becomes more profitable…
That doesn't make it fine. We should not excuse this behaviour just because its rampant already, especially when it comes to such a serious prize
This is textbook plagiarism, scooping their result knowing that the research was part of the training data
The biggest issue we aren't talking about is, of course, that those two researchers were not the only two using ChatGPT to work on the problem at the time
I just want to add to this another update by the author as well: https://mastodon.social/@tristanbuckmaster/11723647135247030... Which seems to be very directly accusing OpenAI of plagiarism
I mean, its years worth of hard work by multiple researchers it would seem, which OpenAI simply lifted and claimed as its own. These researchers weren't just letting OpenAI burn tokens while sipping martinis on a beach
OpenAI's T&Cs let them steal your children I'd suspect, that doesn't make it morally correct
The researchers are pretty directly accusing OpenAI of plagiarism https://mastodon.social/@tristanbuckmaster/11723647135247030...
https://mastodon.social/@tristanbuckmaster/11723647135247030... He very much is accusing them of stealing his work
They kind of did though, they were hoping to keep the fact that they may well have plagiarised these researchers unpublished work quiet. They did not want this to turn into a scandal about the fact that they appear to…
Yeah well, its easy to do if you steal someone elses work and then try to threaten them into staying quiet about it
Are you joking? This is evidence that OpenAI is committing plagiarism en masse of researchers private work and threatening them into staying quiet to re-present their results as their own. This would be one of the…
Drama aside, this solution would be a counterexample disproving the smoothness postulate, which means that it leads to nothing new unfortunately. We already had working solutions to navier stokes, the only thing we…
It isn't a priority dispute, the more concerning allegation is that OpenAI may be training their models on prompts that mathematicians were using to solve this problem, and then surprise surprise OpenAI were able to…
>I asked whether the model had been trained on, or had access to, our sessions in Codex, into which we had been putting all our drafts for the whole of this project. I was told the model did not look up user data. I…
Shockingly poor security to let an application have totally unrestricted access to the web with no review, of course this kind of stuff is going to happen
I mean, they've already violated the law in acquiring all their training data already, why would they be uncomfortable violating a contract to get more training data?