Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Navier-Stokes – Tristan Buckmaster [pdf]

cims.nyu.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

721–730 of 862 posts

Re: Navier-Stokes – Tristan Buckmaster [pdf]

#721

Post by pms »

ghshephard wrote: post #713
hkmaxpro wrote: post #336

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Both Sam Altman and Sebastien Bubeck admitted they only want Buckmaster to be the lead author on a rewrite of the OpenAI proof. https://x.com/sama/status/2097385167002415140 https://x.com/SebastienBubeck/status/2097379411691516310 A wake up call for using OpenAI models. If you discover something with their model and you work for a competitor, they “felt it would be inappropriate” for you “to author OpenAI’s work”.

If this is a "wake up call" - then your legal team needs immediate education. First - there is this - https://openai.com/policies/how-your-data-is-used-to-improve... (linked from the Navier Stokes writeup) I don't know how much more clearly they can write: > When you use our services for individuals such as ChatGPT, Sora, or Operator, we may use your content to train our models. One of the key selling tactics that co…

ChatGPT has this option "Improve the model for everyone" in user preferences, which comes with the attached description, meaning that training on user data can be deactivated:

> Allow your content to be used to train our models, which makes ChatGPT better for you and everyone who uses it. We take steps to protect your privacy. Learn more

The "Learn more" link takes you to the link you've shared.

Re: Navier-Stokes – Tristan Buckmaster [pdf]

#722

Post by retsibsi »

adastra22 wrote: post #473
dgellow wrote: post #375

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Did we read the same tweet? It felt very forthright and level-headed to me. Not at all what I expected.

I appreciate that he responded with (seeming) openness and detail, rather than just posting some pithy insult or whatever would have won him the twitter battle, but this part feels like serious gaslighting or, at best, self-delusion:

> Genuinely, at that moment, I was trying to care for him and do a last ditch attempt to get a chance to give them all the credits that they deserve.

The allegation he is responding to, and which he does not seem to have disputed, is the following passage from Buckmaster's statement (https://cims.nyu.edu/~tristanb/statement.pdf):

> 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.”

Re: Navier-Stokes – Tristan Buckmaster [pdf]

#723

Post by pms »

tristanj wrote: post #219
garyfirestorm wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Second, you miscomprehended the article. The employee did not "threaten to ruin a prominent researcher's career"… Proceeds to ask removal of another coauthor or else we totally discredit you - phrased as why would you do this to yourself.

Claiming OAI was going to "totally discredit" Buckmaster is baseless. From the article, it seems OAI wanted to continue discussing the situation with Buckmaster and reach a resolution, but Buckmaster did not want to, declined to respond, and published first. Also keep in mind we've only heard one side of the story, so any interpretation of events so far is incomplete. There should be a lot more information from OAI's…

Are we reading the same article (page 3)?

Re: Navier-Stokes – Tristan Buckmaster [pdf]

#724

Post by troupo »

adastra22 wrote: post #573
djokkataja wrote: post #556

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The first part of the sentence is important: > Importantly it was admitted that internal Anthropic models had been used in their proof of Euler blowup; I therefore felt I could not consider Levent to be an independent academic. If an Anthropic employee is doing independent research, but with models that aren't available to the public (because they're internal models), then . . . idk. It's not clear to me why that sho…

This is being reported as OpenAI wanting to strip an Anthropic employee of academic credit for the work they did. What the OpenAI person involved is claiming is that they wanted the outside researcher(s) to put their name on OpenAI's work: to headline OpenAI's publication of what they earnestly believed to be an independent result. If true, that's generous and beyond the level of generosity one should expect. Extendi…

> What the OpenAI person involved is claiming is that they wanted the outside researcher(s) to put their name on OpenAI's work

> If true, that's generous and beyond the level of generosity one should expect

"We highly likely stole your work, and threatened you with 'this is bad for your career' and we refuse to acknowledge any work by your collaborator just because he works at a competitor, but we are so so so so generous"

Re: Navier-Stokes – Tristan Buckmaster [pdf]

#725

Post by golem14 »

bawolff wrote: post #297
n2d4 wrote: 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…

> 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 only if they remove Levent as an author, as he works for Anthropic well that sounds like an asshole move.

Something like this got Schmidt/ Jobs into serious trouble …

Re: Navier-Stokes – Tristan Buckmaster [pdf]

#726

Post by dagasonhackason »

I also solved Navier Stokes and went chatting about my solution to OpenAI Models. Mine is even faster it beats theirs just run a bench mark but they came to the similar weak solutionI uploaded to open ai several months ago. Current confused, did they retrain their models on it? I didn’t give off the full information but my strong solution beats their just benchmarked yesterday.

Re: Navier-Stokes – Tristan Buckmaster [pdf]

#727

Post by [deleted] »

DeepSeaTortoise wrote: post #698
esalman wrote: post #662

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I work in catastrophe risk modeling and it's a multi billion dollar industry. We often chat where the business might be heading in future. An uncomfortable scenario is what if a frontier tech company decides to offer our customers the same products that we do. There's a lot of pressure on AI adoption so the company has partnered with various tech companies to build intelligent systems on top of proprietary data and m…

> If OpenAI is indeed using customer data to train their models to win a $1m prize Is that even a question? Of course everything not kept on premise at gunpoint is going to be trained on. The chances of getting caught are 0 and the consequences of getting caught are 0 (as we've seen with copyright laws going from sending people to jail for years to unenforced within months). Yet the benefits are through the roof. You…

[deleted]

Re: Navier-Stokes – Tristan Buckmaster [pdf]

#728

Post by AlexCoventry »

DeepSeaTortoise wrote: post #698
esalman wrote: post #662

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I work in catastrophe risk modeling and it's a multi billion dollar industry. We often chat where the business might be heading in future. An uncomfortable scenario is what if a frontier tech company decides to offer our customers the same products that we do. There's a lot of pressure on AI adoption so the company has partnered with various tech companies to build intelligent systems on top of proprietary data and m…

> If OpenAI is indeed using customer data to train their models to win a $1m prize Is that even a question? Of course everything not kept on premise at gunpoint is going to be trained on. The chances of getting caught are 0 and the consequences of getting caught are 0 (as we've seen with copyright laws going from sending people to jail for years to unenforced within months). Yet the benefits are through the roof. You…

I'm not a lawyer, but I think the comparison to copyright law is invalid. Such a dispute would be governed by contract law.

Re: Navier-Stokes – Tristan Buckmaster [pdf]

#729

Post by fc417fc802 »

Tanjreeve wrote: post #675
fc417fc802 wrote: post #557

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What about my line of reasoning is nonsense? I made no claim either in support of or contrary to yours. Rather I pointed out that by this logic literally everything that an LLM spits out is plagiarism of the vast majority of the entire body of human literature in existence. Can you offer meaningful refutation of that observation of mine?

That's exactly the argument of the people calling it plagiarism machines. No-one ever really did refute it there was just a bunch of settlements for elite institutions so they weren't left empty handed like the various small time creators/authors etc were. I think the bigger issue here is this feels like some PR smoothing happening that after all the work that went into "it's safe to use for enterprises" now we have…

> now we have what looks like openAI using private user data to scoop novel research

Is there any actual evidence of that? All I've seen so far are empty accusations because "it would be in their interests" or whatever. Personally I'm inclined to believe that they honor their terms until it's demonstrated otherwise.

Re: Navier-Stokes – Tristan Buckmaster [pdf]

#730

Post by tpkm »

ghshephard wrote: post #713
hkmaxpro wrote: post #336

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Both Sam Altman and Sebastien Bubeck admitted they only want Buckmaster to be the lead author on a rewrite of the OpenAI proof. https://x.com/sama/status/2097385167002415140 https://x.com/SebastienBubeck/status/2097379411691516310 A wake up call for using OpenAI models. If you discover something with their model and you work for a competitor, they “felt it would be inappropriate” for you “to author OpenAI’s work”.

If this is a "wake up call" - then your legal team needs immediate education. First - there is this - https://openai.com/policies/how-your-data-is-used-to-improve... (linked from the Navier Stokes writeup) I don't know how much more clearly they can write: > When you use our services for individuals such as ChatGPT, Sora, or Operator, we may use your content to train our models. One of the key selling tactics that co…

The training on user data only applies to free accounts - paid and Enterprise accounts guarantee data is not used for training. Plenty of Enterprises use the APIs directly - that's just plain misinformation
Post reply on HN