Basically, it looks like Anthropic wanted to solve a Millenium Prize problem before their IPO, then OpenAI caught wind of it and solved it first. But now the NYU professor that worked with Anthropic is accusing OpenAI of stealing research from his Codex prompts, which raises wider privacy issues here.
> I asked when the first prompt had been sent by them. This question was not answered directly by OpenAI for some time. Eventually it was agreed that it had been sent in the past few days, after information about our work had reached OpenAI.
> 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 asked again, about training, and I did not get an answer.
> Two proposals were offered to me. The first was that we post our Euler result, and that OpenAI post its Navier-Stokes result the next day. The second was that, after posting Euler, I alone write a paper presenting the Navier-Stokes result, acknowledging that an internal OpenAI model had resolved it. Sebastien twice asserted that he wanted Levent removed from authorship, and said it would all be simple if only it were not the case that, and it was so annoying that, Levent works at Anthropic. It was also said that if OpenAI posted after us, they would say that we deserved the Clay Prize, and that we were the “closest humans to the problem”. I declined both offers.
> I said that if OpenAI released its result in the way proposed I would go public with what happened. The reply was, “Why would you ruin your career?” I replied that I am an academic, and asked why he thought going public would ruin my career. The reply was, “If you don’t want me to be nice, then I don’t have to be nice.”
GC_Gee on
i went to r/math to see the discussion on this because where else, and uh wow lol. anyone know where its actually being discussed well?
ScrawnyCheeath on
Somehow allowing a questionably valuable industry to ignore copyright law in order to prove it’s value has gone wrong.
Who could’ve seen this coming
SpotMe365 on
Mathematicians: “We used ChatGPT to solve this math problem, so we deserve the credit!”
OpenAI: “Actually, we used ChatGPT to solve this math problem, so we deserve the credit!”
ChatGPT: “Isn’t there someone you forgot to ask?”
Opus_723 on
I don’t really get why r/neoliberal is becoming partially an AI sub? Like, what does this have to do with neoliberalism?
cdstephens on
I love accompanying this technological achievement is an old-school academic feud regarding credit. Fight fight fight
JesterOfAllTrades on
It’s AI assisted either way (and I say this as a hater)
If this was solved by a human it would be the biggest news in math in 20 years. Solved by a machine, it’s basically the end of an era/start of a new one.
MyrinVonBryhana on
Fight! Fight! Fight!
In all seriousness between this, their recklessness and incompetence in testing new models, and the fact that their trying so hard to court this administration (with quite possibly all the accompanying corruption) it seems like it’s only a matter of time before OpenAI gets in a shit ton of legal trouble.
8 Comments
Submission Statement:
Basically, it looks like Anthropic wanted to solve a Millenium Prize problem before their IPO, then OpenAI caught wind of it and solved it first. But now the NYU professor that worked with Anthropic is accusing OpenAI of stealing research from his Codex prompts, which raises wider privacy issues here.
Buckmaster’s statement: https://cims.nyu.edu/~tristanb/statement.pdf
Most important part:
> I asked when the first prompt had been sent by them. This question was not answered directly by OpenAI for some time. Eventually it was agreed that it had been sent in the past few days, after information about our work had reached OpenAI.
> 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 asked again, about training, and I did not get an answer.
> Two proposals were offered to me. The first was that we post our Euler result, and that OpenAI post its Navier-Stokes result the next day. The second was that, after posting Euler, I alone write a paper presenting the Navier-Stokes result, acknowledging that an internal OpenAI model had resolved it. Sebastien twice asserted that he wanted Levent removed from authorship, and said it would all be simple if only it were not the case that, and it was so annoying that, Levent works at Anthropic. It was also said that if OpenAI posted after us, they would say that we deserved the Clay Prize, and that we were the “closest humans to the problem”. I declined both offers.
> I said that if OpenAI released its result in the way proposed I would go public with what happened. The reply was, “Why would you ruin your career?” I replied that I am an academic, and asked why he thought going public would ruin my career. The reply was, “If you don’t want me to be nice, then I don’t have to be nice.”
i went to r/math to see the discussion on this because where else, and uh wow lol. anyone know where its actually being discussed well?
Somehow allowing a questionably valuable industry to ignore copyright law in order to prove it’s value has gone wrong.
Who could’ve seen this coming
Mathematicians: “We used ChatGPT to solve this math problem, so we deserve the credit!”
OpenAI: “Actually, we used ChatGPT to solve this math problem, so we deserve the credit!”
ChatGPT: “Isn’t there someone you forgot to ask?”
I don’t really get why r/neoliberal is becoming partially an AI sub? Like, what does this have to do with neoliberalism?
I love accompanying this technological achievement is an old-school academic feud regarding credit. Fight fight fight
It’s AI assisted either way (and I say this as a hater)
If this was solved by a human it would be the biggest news in math in 20 years. Solved by a machine, it’s basically the end of an era/start of a new one.
Fight! Fight! Fight!
In all seriousness between this, their recklessness and incompetence in testing new models, and the fact that their trying so hard to court this administration (with quite possibly all the accompanying corruption) it seems like it’s only a matter of time before OpenAI gets in a shit ton of legal trouble.