Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't even understand the conflict tbh. Probably I'm just dense. Tristan is not claiming NS, just a huge advance which may solve NS soon. OAI is claiming NS and willing to credit Tristan for the ideas and publish after. Oai offers two options, the second Tristan views as dishonest. But Tristan rejects the first, why? Because he thinks it's theft? But then why would OAI threaten him?
> But Tristan rejects the first, why? Because he thinks it's theft? But then why would OAI threaten him? Did the first offer also come with the outrageous condition that he exclude his co-author from the credit?
Navier-Stokes – Tristan Buckmaster [pdf]
281–290 of 862 posts
Re: Navier-Stokes – Tristan Buckmaster [pdf]
#282Re: Navier-Stokes – Tristan Buckmaster [pdf]
#283Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Ignoring the drama But the drama here is a little important. Stealing the millennium prize for N-S is sort of a big deal, especially to those who had been working on it for the last few years.
The math is all that matters.
Re: Navier-Stokes – Tristan Buckmaster [pdf]
#284Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't even understand the conflict tbh. Probably I'm just dense. Tristan is not claiming NS, just a huge advance which may solve NS soon. OAI is claiming NS and willing to credit Tristan for the ideas and publish after. Oai offers two options, the second Tristan views as dishonest. But Tristan rejects the first, why? Because he thinks it's theft? But then why would OAI threaten him?
He claims to have found a counterexample for NS (see the second paragraph of the article), but the paper is not ready yet. OpenAI claims to already have a full proof (which they produced in the past 5 days after the rumors leaked). Hence the dispute. What I find interesting is the timeline of when he found counterexample for NS is very unclear. Did Tristan find a counterexample weeks ago or was it very recently? Was…
Re: Navier-Stokes – Tristan Buckmaster [pdf]
#285Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Ignoring the drama But the drama here is a little important. Stealing the millennium prize for N-S is sort of a big deal, especially to those who had been working on it for the last few years.
The math is all that matters.
Re: Navier-Stokes – Tristan Buckmaster [pdf]
#286Drama/accusation summary: - Aug 15th: Tristan Buckmaster & Levent Alpöge make progress on a few important math problems, "finite-time blowup with smooth forcing for incompressible porous media, for Boussinesq, and for 3d incompressible Euler." - they do NOT have a proof for the $1,000,000 Millenium Prize problem. BUT, they do claim to have a proof for a similar (non-Millenium) Navier Stokes problem that could help le…
Ignoring the drama, when can we expect the lean proof of this great sensational discovery?
Re: Navier-Stokes – Tristan Buckmaster [pdf]
#287Drama/accusation summary: - Aug 15th: Tristan Buckmaster & Levent Alpöge make progress on a few important math problems, "finite-time blowup with smooth forcing for incompressible porous media, for Boussinesq, and for 3d incompressible Euler." - they do NOT have a proof for the $1,000,000 Millenium Prize problem. BUT, they do claim to have a proof for a similar (non-Millenium) Navier Stokes problem that could help le…
Re: Navier-Stokes – Tristan Buckmaster [pdf]
#288Earlier quoted context omitted.
It seems exceptionally unlikely to me that OpenAI would be "reading user prompts". More likely is a leak somewhere else. Obviously Anthropic/OpenAI are engaged in espionage stuff with each other. I am guessing Levent just mentioned something to someone at Anthropic and it got out.
why is this downvoted? do people really think OpenAI is snooping at people specifically? like they are looking for good leads into new problems or ideas and they found this guy's codex thread and used it? come on man, even for conspiracy theories this is stupid.
Re: Navier-Stokes – Tristan Buckmaster [pdf]
#289Earlier quoted context omitted.
this is a highly marketable problem and specific teams at OpenAI were aware of specific competitor efforts. I would be surprised if this were happening on a large scale, but 1. Less than a hundred people in the world are working at this problem, 2. A significant fraction of those happen to work at competing hyperscalers, 3. Those hyperscalers repeatedly show themselves not to take user privacy seriously
I'm not sure what your points 1 and 2 have to do with anything. Both directionally increase the probability of hyperscalers also finding the solution independently. > Those hyperscalers repeatedly show themselves not to take user privacy seriously where? Any examples?
Re: Navier-Stokes – Tristan Buckmaster [pdf]
#290Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Ignoring the drama But the drama here is a little important. Stealing the millennium prize for N-S is sort of a big deal, especially to those who had been working on it for the last few years.
The math is all that matters.
So if math is all that matters to you, you should care about this.