Why are people so possessive? Why wouldn't they just release their work for the profit of humanity? I'm genuinely curious.
Mathematicians are way more open about what they do than OpenAI is.
Mathematicians want proof OpenAI didn't use their work
11–20 of 93 posts
Re: Mathematicians want proof OpenAI didn't use their work
#12Why are people so possessive? Why wouldn't they just release their work for the profit of humanity? I'm genuinely curious.
They are releasing their work for the profit of the humanity. They do not like OpenAI claiming credit for it. After all, profit of the humanity and profit of the OpenAI are two different things. Maybe even mutually exclusive at this point.
And lying about whether the proof was done by mathematicians or OpenAI is bad humanity, so.
Re: Mathematicians want proof OpenAI didn't use their work
#13Why are people so possessive? Why wouldn't they just release their work for the profit of humanity? I'm genuinely curious.
I have the same question, why OpenAI and Anthropic just don't release everything as open source?
Re: Mathematicians want proof OpenAI didn't use their work
#14Why are people so possessive? Why wouldn't they just release their work for the profit of humanity? I'm genuinely curious.
a quote from the article: "Thom said it “would be ethically indefensible” if nonpublic research supplied by users helped to improve models that the company then used to race those very same users to publication, without consent, proper disclosure, or credit."
Re: Mathematicians want proof OpenAI didn't use their work
#15Why are people so possessive? Why wouldn't they just release their work for the profit of humanity? I'm genuinely curious.
Because it's not humanity that profits, it's OpenAI.
Walk me through how the sofic result OpenAI publixhed profits OpenAI but had no benefit to humanity? Why were Thom and others working on it if it had no value?
Re: Mathematicians want proof OpenAI didn't use their work
#16If I understand correctly OpenAI cannot provide it. Because the models are essentially black boxes, especially this far after the fact, determining if this result built on training data based on conversations about the problem is impossible. So unless they can prove those conversations were never used for training then there’s no way to know.
Only under gross negligence would it be unprovable: Did you use a model whose training set included user data? Did the transcripts of any of the agents include a tool call whose result including user data?
Re: Mathematicians want proof OpenAI didn't use their work
#17Why are people so possessive? Why wouldn't they just release their work for the profit of humanity? I'm genuinely curious.
[deleted]
Re: Mathematicians want proof OpenAI didn't use their work
#18Why are people so possessive? Why wouldn't they just release their work for the profit of humanity? I'm genuinely curious.
1. Academic/research credit
2. There was a $1,000,000 reward
Re: Mathematicians want proof OpenAI didn't use their work
#19Am I missing something obvious? Isn’t this just a simple DB query to see the state history of the “Data Controls” → “Improve model for everyone” toggle in the settings? Just report whether that was ever on and over what time period.
Re: Mathematicians want proof OpenAI didn't use their work
#20If I understand correctly OpenAI cannot provide it. Because the models are essentially black boxes, especially this far after the fact, determining if this result built on training data based on conversations about the problem is impossible. So unless they can prove those conversations were never used for training then there’s no way to know.
This is exactly the issue. What the mathematicians could do is reveal whether they had the data-sharing opt-out on or not. But curiously, as far as I've seen, none of them will answer that question!
And its reasonable to assume that if they did, in fact, opt out, they'd make it clear.
Most people do not understand that the main reason for the subscriptions is to give OpenAI and Anthropic the priceless, unique data that shows how the models are used, what people are building, how they are building, which solutions they consider OK, which they consider bad -- they purchase this data with cheap tokens. This is their only moat, really. If some really proprietary IP gets swept in the training data set its not really OpenAI's fault -- its the researchers'. Have something secretive? Dont fricking paste this into chatgpt. Duh!
(I'd definitely not think OpenAI/Anthropic ignore the opt outs, or ZDRs. All it would take is one whistleblower to get them into terminal troubles. And why would they do it? They are not in the business of scooping unique IP -- they are in the business of understanding how AI is used across a variety of mundane, day to day work of individuals and companies. Useless math problem is good (or bad, as in this case) PR, but otherwise entirely worthless for the labs.