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

More questions about whether researchers can trust OpenAI with unpublished math

mathstodon.xyz

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 849 posts

Re: More questions about whether researchers can trust OpenAI with unpublished math

#51

Post by dakolli »

bambax wrote: post #37

All the big AI labs were built on stealing IP; who is surprised that's still how they operate? And who believes, or has ever believed, their promises that your data is private and not logged, etc.? The big AI labs are not trying to advance humanity, they are in this for the money, and as most (all?) private companies they don't care about ethics at all. That doesn't mean they can't be useful, or that their products a…

It's hilarious how people think they care about their reputation, and wouldn't circumvent ZDR policies. Like bro, they literally covertly hired Apple employees and had them steal IP and equipment form Apple. They aren't scared of Apple lawyers, so they definitely aren't scared of yours.

Re: More questions about whether researchers can trust OpenAI with unpublished math

#52

Post by calf »

r0ze-at-hn wrote: post #15

Doing some research and at this point doing it very much in the open with dates on GitHub so if any AI Lab says they re-discover my exact work it will be obvious that the AI used or was trained on my work. I am guessing anyone in a similar situation is now thinking about how they date their existing work if the math is done, but the proses are not.

If only prompts could also be watermarked.

Re: More questions about whether researchers can trust OpenAI with unpublished math

#53

Post by dakolli »

vaylian wrote: post #41

This article explains the controversy and the mathematical problem much better than the tweet and toots: https://www.science.org/content/article/how-ai-math-breakthr...

Gromov’s soficity conjecture isn't even mentioned in the article you shared.

Why are you saying that this article explains it much better than the tweet that you clearly didn't even read..

Re: More questions about whether researchers can trust OpenAI with unpublished math

#54

Post by ga_to »

profsummergig wrote: post #25

Only after reading this post did I learn that my preferred AI trains on my inputs (prompts). How was I not aware of this before?

Because you have not been paying attention to the discourse regarding AI for the last couple years? That AIs unethical train on data wherever they may get it from has been in the news basically weekly.

Re: More questions about whether researchers can trust OpenAI with unpublished math

#55

Post by dgellow »

vaylian wrote: post #41

This article explains the controversy and the mathematical problem much better than the tweet and toots: https://www.science.org/content/article/how-ai-math-breakthr...

I prefer to read the actual sources for anything related to AI companies given how much AI nonsense journalists seem to accept without any skepticism

Re: More questions about whether researchers can trust OpenAI with unpublished math

#56

Post by vaylian »

dakolli wrote: post #53
vaylian wrote: post #41

This article explains the controversy and the mathematical problem much better than the tweet and toots: https://www.science.org/content/article/how-ai-math-breakthr...

Gromov’s soficity conjecture isn't even mentioned in the article you shared. Why are you saying that this article explains it much better than the tweet that you clearly didn't even read..

I read the tweet several times but there is so much context missing, that the tweet itself is not enough.

Re: More questions about whether researchers can trust OpenAI with unpublished math

#57

Post by dgellow »

olalonde wrote: post #46
msy wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Given OpenAI's well documented history of unethical behaviour it seems adorably naive to think they actually do that in general, or that they wouldn't pull this particular data separately to generate these proofs.

Unethical doesn't mean irrational. They'd be risking massive lawsuits and a total loss of trust if they got caught lying about this. Doesn't seem worth it.

Sounds like exactly what OpenAI would do?

Re: More questions about whether researchers can trust OpenAI with unpublished math

#58

Post by dgellow »

dist-epoch wrote: post #22
itake wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The AI only seem to solve the problems that it had human trading data on… If this wasn’t human driven, I’d expect to see other problems within that problem. Space solved not just the ones that it had chat data on.

There have been about 6-8 major math breakthroughs claimed by AI. Only for 2 of them there are public accusations about the training data.

That we know of

Re: More questions about whether researchers can trust OpenAI with unpublished math

#60

Post by card_zero »

ThalesX wrote: post #27

[flagged]

If, as you say, it doesn't matter that the AI company gets praise for somebody else's discovery, then it also wouldn't matter if the praise went to the academic. You apparently resent the academic for seeking praise instead of being content with anonymously advancing human knowledge, but you don't resent the AI company seeking praise while leaching off the academic.
Post reply on HN