Live data from Hacker News

Navier-Stokes – Tristan Buckmaster [pdf]

cims.nyu.edu

371–380 of 872 posts

Re: Navier-Stokes – Tristan Buckmaster [pdf]

#371
post #83

Drama/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…

It's specifically the last two bullet poitns - Tristan is suspicious of the timing, as only few others were trying this approach. OpenAI says the model didn't access his user data directly, but leaves unanswered whether Tristan's chat conversations were part of the training. - OpenAI says they would partially credit Tristan for the $1,000,000 discovery (even though Tristan did not solve the $1,000,000 problem) — but…

If that part of the PDF is true that’s so disgusting, psychopathic behaviour

> 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.” Some time later Levent received a text proposing that he and Sebastien speak one on one, saying, “I don’t know if Tristan is being fully rational right now.”

Re: Navier-Stokes – Tristan Buckmaster [pdf]

#372
post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He didn't even make that accusation! > 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. The shocking/interesting thing would be if it was trained on the sessions. I think it's very implausible tha…

Why would this be implausible? ChatGPT user sessions were found publicly exposed to the internet not too long ago. Moreover, OpenAI has continued to play a hype-marketing game by revealing how their models keep breaking out of the sandbox. Conspiracy minded thinking is not helpful, but why should OpenAI be granted the benefit of the doubt here after being caught doing underhanded/negligent shit on several previous oc…

>ChatGPT user sessions were found publicly exposed to the internet not too long ago

Do you mean publicly shared chats were able to be accessed by the public? That's the point of the feature.

Re: Navier-Stokes – Tristan Buckmaster [pdf]

#373

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's specifically the last two bullet poitns - Tristan is suspicious of the timing, as only few others were trying this approach. OpenAI says the model didn't access his user data directly, but leaves unanswered whether Tristan's chat conversations were part of the training. - OpenAI says they would partially credit Tristan for the $1,000,000 discovery (even though Tristan did not solve the $1,000,000 problem) — but…

If that part of the PDF is true that’s so disgusting, psychopathic behaviour > 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.” Some time later Lev…

With "rational" being defined as "not making us look bad" at best, and "letting us take credit for their work" at worst.

Yes, that is disgusting.

Re: Navier-Stokes – Tristan Buckmaster [pdf]

#374
> "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."

These are the kinds of people in charge of the reins, folks.

Re: Navier-Stokes – Tristan Buckmaster [pdf]

#375

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>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.” If this is true he should release the actual emails. This is a very serious accusation and he sho…

> If this is true he should release the actual emails these were statements while on a call, and at least the career comment Bubeck has admitted to while doing damage control ("I deeply apologize for this extremely poor choice of words, it is the opposite of what I was trying to convey. (I should say that I retracted them on the spot by the way.)"[1]). [1] https://xcancel.com/SebastienBubeck/status/20973794116915163.…

What a horrible response from Bubeck. How did he think that would make him and OpenAI look good to tweet that?

Re: Navier-Stokes – Tristan Buckmaster [pdf]

#376
post #284

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Hypo-dissipative NS != NS

Thanks, I wasn't aware of this technicality.

Re: Navier-Stokes – Tristan Buckmaster [pdf]

#377
post #109
post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Zero data retention, wink. No looksies, wink. No trainsies, wink.

Well, Buckmaster says both his and Alpöge's use of Codex was non-institutional, and OpenAI claims the right to train their models on inputs and outputs of non-enterprise users in their service policies [0]. So I'm not sure they were even promised that. [0] https://openai.com/policies/how-your-data-is-used-to-improve...

[deleted]

Re: Navier-Stokes – Tristan Buckmaster [pdf]

#378
post #83

Drama/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…

From OpenAI's post https://openai.com/index/navier-stokes-solution/

"Since August 28 we have been training a new internal model that has exhibited unprecedented performance in our benchmarks, including mathematics. This model’s training is ongoing and its performance continues to improve."

"When a further trained version of our internal model became available over the course of the effort"

"While unlikely, we cannot rule out that de-identified data derived from their usage of our products helped improve our models "

Re: Navier-Stokes – Tristan Buckmaster [pdf]

#379
post #131

I'm not one to comment often but this really pisses me off. OpenAI looked at user data, stole world class researchers' work, and then tried to threaten those researchers to do what would make their corporation profit (which they would anyways!). Imagine you have been working on a terribly difficult math problem for a decade. This is a result you have spent years on, and what you will likely be remembered for. And to…

> OpenAI looked at user data, stole world class researchers' work This doesn't seem to be clear and is very implausible for a large company. Be as cynical as you want, but a normal researcher will simply not have access rights to this data, which will be siloed away somewhere else. It might very well be somewhat unfair to catch wind of a promising approach and then try to frontrun them by throwing compute at the prob…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN