Is OpenAI Taking Everyone for Fools? • Hacker News Board

Re: Is OpenAI Taking Everyone for Fools?

#31

Post by greygoo222 » Wed, Sep 09, 2026, 10:28 PM UTC

fwlr wrote: post #11

demibabs wrote: post #9

This article is completely mistaken. The original researchers did not solve Navier-Stokes, while OpenAI did. Ironically, this seems like the type of mistake you'd make if you used AI to do your research.

For my money, the most “AI does my research” mistake I’ve seen in this whole mess is someone saying “the original researchers did not solve Navier-Stokes, while OpenAI did”. It has all the hallmarks of a classic AI blunder - partially eliding the name of the concept while oversimplifying the concept, a dramatic burst of confidence because it got to express its conclusion as a contradiction, etc. You can practically h…

[flagged]

Re: Is OpenAI Taking Everyone for Fools?

#32

Post by pcstl » Wed, Sep 09, 2026, 10:29 PM UTC

imjonse wrote: post #6

OpenAI should put their internal model to solve the rest of Millenium Prize problems too (assuming their difficulty is in the same ballpark). That would be a proof the model did it without using existing work on the problem.

>assuming their difficulty is in the same ballpark

It is not. Many mathematicians have said that they don't expect to see solutions to the other 5 problems in their lifetimes.

Of course, AI might advance fast enough that the "in their lifetimes" part ends up wrong, but there is a considerable gap to the other problems. We have barely any idea of how to even get started on most of them.

Re: Is OpenAI Taking Everyone for Fools?

#33

Post by [deleted] » Wed, Sep 09, 2026, 10:58 PM UTC

andriy_koval wrote: post #30

aedfhgaerty wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://xcancel.com/sebastienbubeck/status/20973794116915163... >It is in that context that I said “it would be simpler if Levent was not an Anthropic employee” because I felt it would be inappropriate for an Anthropic employee to author OpenAI’s work. >I was confused why one would turn an incredible source for celebration (of their achievements!) into such bickering, which is when I said that I did not understand wh…

> But he wasn't lying. and we know this how?

[deleted]

Re: Is OpenAI Taking Everyone for Fools?

#34

Post by aeve890 » Wed, Sep 09, 2026, 11:03 PM UTC

bearseascape wrote: post #7

imjonse wrote: post #6

OpenAI should put their internal model to solve the rest of Millenium Prize problems too (assuming their difficulty is in the same ballpark). That would be a proof the model did it without using existing work on the problem.

They did do this, but it seems that Navier-Stokes is the only one that was successful (unless, for some strange reason, they have proofs for the other problems but haven’t released them yet).

>They did do this, but it seems that Navier-Stokes is the only one that was successful

How convenient that they could solve the only problem where researchers have done most of the legwork already. What a coincidence. And the timing, perfect.

Re: Is OpenAI Taking Everyone for Fools?

#35

Post by rsfern » Wed, Sep 09, 2026, 11:12 PM UTC

andriy_koval wrote: post #30

aedfhgaerty wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://xcancel.com/sebastienbubeck/status/20973794116915163... >It is in that context that I said “it would be simpler if Levent was not an Anthropic employee” because I felt it would be inappropriate for an Anthropic employee to author OpenAI’s work. >I was confused why one would turn an incredible source for celebration (of their achievements!) into such bickering, which is when I said that I did not understand wh…

> But he wasn't lying. and we know this how?

Without seeing the full correspondence it’s hard to evaluate for sure, but parent linked to a tweet from the OpenAI employee at the center of the controversy, that’s a primary source you can read and evaluate yourself

Personally I don’t find the tweet a satisfactory explanation of their behavior, it seems like a lot of deflection without directly responding to the specific claims of front-running, and the screen cap of the correspondence doesn’t include all the relevant context. If there was really no bad behavior, why not post the whole thing?

Re: Is OpenAI Taking Everyone for Fools?

#36

Post by andriy_koval » Wed, Sep 09, 2026, 11:26 PM UTC

rsfern wrote: post #35

andriy_koval wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But he wasn't lying. and we know this how?

Without seeing the full correspondence it’s hard to evaluate for sure, but parent linked to a tweet from the OpenAI employee at the center of the controversy, that’s a primary source you can read and evaluate yourself Personally I don’t find the tweet a satisfactory explanation of their behavior, it seems like a lot of deflection without directly responding to the specific claims of front-running, and the screen cap…

> If there was really no bad behavior, why not post the whole thing?

what is whole thing?..

Re: Is OpenAI Taking Everyone for Fools?

#37

Post by nozzlegear » Wed, Sep 09, 2026, 11:29 PM UTC

simianwords wrote: post #22

TitusCaius wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Though they claim the contrary, it looks that OpenAI would get nowhere if it did not have information about a recent breakthrough.

Comment that will age poorly

Enlighten us?

Re: Is OpenAI Taking Everyone for Fools?

#38

Post by nozzlegear » Wed, Sep 09, 2026, 11:30 PM UTC

simianwords wrote: post #23

zaubarari wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's just a desperate attempt to prove how grandiose their new model is

Yeah how desperate to literally solve a Millenium problem? They sure look stupid now. You’ve caught them!

This but unironically

Re: Is OpenAI Taking Everyone for Fools?

#39

Post by nozzlegear » Wed, Sep 09, 2026, 11:33 PM UTC

elevatedastalt wrote: post #8

cratermoon wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, we're arguing over whether or not openai stole the other researcher's work. The evidence is pretty damning. https://techcrunch.com/2026/09/08/openai-fought-dirty-on-car...

Actually the evidence is not damning at all. The evidence is a combination of two things: Tristan insinuating they did (note, not claiming but suggesting or implying), and their own statement saying "While unlikely, we cannot rule out that de-identified data derived from their usage of our products helped improve our models ." The latter is being used by everyone as a sign of guilt, but it's clear that they are makin…

The lady doth protest too much, methinks.

Re: Is OpenAI Taking Everyone for Fools?

#40

Post by rsfern » Wed, Sep 09, 2026, 11:57 PM UTC

andriy_koval wrote: post #36

rsfern wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Without seeing the full correspondence it’s hard to evaluate for sure, but parent linked to a tweet from the OpenAI employee at the center of the controversy, that’s a primary source you can read and evaluate yourself Personally I don’t find the tweet a satisfactory explanation of their behavior, it seems like a lot of deflection without directly responding to the specific claims of front-running, and the screen cap…

> If there was really no bad behavior, why not post the whole thing? what is whole thing?..

The screen cap of their full correspondence in the Twitter thread, which was the subject of the preceding sentence. The Twitter post has an obviously incomplete fragment of the conversation that doesn’t resolve what the author presents it as resolving, which is the dispute over how the discussion of authorship of Alpöge actually went down