Hacker News Reader

Comment by softwaredoug | Hacker News Reader

Probably because both sides have strong vested interests and it’s next to impossible to find a dispassionate point of view.

The Pro AI crowd, VC, tech CEOs etc have strong incentive to claim humans are obsolete. Many tech employees see threats to their jobs and want to poopoo any way AI could be useful or competitive.

View on HN

That's a huge hyperbole. I can assure you many people find the entire thing genuinely fascinating, without having any vested interest and without buying the hype.

Sure but it’s still a gold rush with a lot of exaggeration pushed by tech executives to acquire investors. There’s a lot of greed and fear to go around. I think LLMs are fascinating and cool myself having grown up with Eliza and crappy expert systems, but am more interested in deep learning outcomes like Alphafold than general purpose LLMs. You don’t hear enough about non-LLM AI because of all the money riding on LLM based tech. It’s hard not to see the bad behavior that has arisen due to all the money being thrown about. So that is to say it makes sense there is some skepticism as you can’t take what these companies say at face value. It’d be nice to have a toned down discussion about what LLMs can and can’t do but there is a lot of obfuscation and hype. Also there is the conversation about what they should or shouldn’t be doing which is completely fair to talk about.

That's just another way to state that everybody is almost always self-serving when it comes to anything.

Or some can spot a euphoric bubble when they see it with lots of participants who have over-invested in 90% of these so called AI startups that are not frontier labs.

What does this have to do with the math Olympiad? Why would it frame your view of the accomplishment?

Why don’t they release some info beyond a vague twitter hype post? I’m beginning to hate OpenAI for releasing statements like this that invariably end up being less impressive than they make it sound initially.

The proofs were published on GitHub for inspection, along with some details (generated within the time limit, by a system locked before the problems were released, with no external tools).

https://github.com/aw31/openai-imo-2025-proofs/tree/main

dude we have computers reasoning in english to solve math problems, what are you even talking about

I tested all available models on a harder highschool limit and they failed even with thinking mode, so I doubt OpenAI is telling the truth.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com