This is the most suspicious thing to me. If their chat data were available to the corpus to be trained on (I thought they claimed not to do this?) then it really might be as simple as querying the model with "describe recent work from Tristan Buckmaster" and it will spit out this problem and his approach. No need to directly read his user data.
This is basically just scooping, real scumbag behavior.
it is common that multiple people essentially simultaneously prove/invent the same thing
I see zero evidence of wrongdoing
I don't agree with the oil claim analogy. this is knowledge, freely given to the world. not something hoarded by a corporation
and you can argue this is "fair use" or whatever, not the point now, the point is that it definitely makes those accusations no longer "baseless".
in addition, it is not given freely to the world, it is the knowledge of the Internet/WWW being sold back to you as a subscription service. it's not free. and it's not even "given", because they can (technically) turn off the tap at any moment and you don't have it any more.
I mean some companies glean insight into new products merely by asking other people what they do for a living.
People need to get over this ownership thing, it's being taken too far. Humans benefit from the efforts of others simple as that.
Even if you’re starting from a position that credit for a discovery literally can’t be stolen, that still doesn’t resolve in OpenAI’s favor here.
it seems like Buckmaster got one-upped and is upset. understandable, but I find their reaction childish as well
Why does OpenAI get to dictate who Buckmaster can claim co-authorship with?
> I find their reaction childish
OpenAI may have, with full plausible deniability, taken Buckmaster’s work and passed it off—in substantial part—as their own. (Fitting into a fact pattern of them having tried to do the same with Apple.)
There is a material takeaway for anyone who does creative or otherwise unique work from this. (Which is unfortunate. Whatever happened here, AI clearly accelerated the discovery process.) For anyone else, I agree it’s just drama.
https://www.reddit.com/r/mathematics/comments/1wauync/commen...
It doesn't seem like there's anyone at OAI who knows much about the problem they are solving. Seems like CS theorists or algebraists* trying to own the pros by driving a car that's beyond their skill level. For one, they didn't cite the guys that B&A based their work on.
*It would be most fair to say there are no analysts on board, nor are they likely hire any soon; those are the least impressionable people in math. Applied math PDE elves who hadn't already left on the world-model boats would have jumped off around the time that eg Ilya did because they wouldnt have been able to stand the three Bs pretending to be experts in fields they imagine to be "adjacent".. like Public Relations
We can't say this until we have more information on what the OpenAI researchers prompted their model with and to what degree Buckmaster's work was fed into its training data, either by Buckmaster himself or by his co-author.
The culture at OpenAI being systematically revealed by Apple’s lawsuit, for one.
Was that a one shot prompt? or something guided by human, step by step?
If that's the later, it won't use the same approach when not guided by the same human.