Hacker News Reader

Comment by SpicyLemonZest | Hacker News Reader

I'm not sure how you've ended up so frustrated with an advisory group whose advice has not been given. Human mathematicians routinely delay publication of their results past the point you describe; is someone gatekeeping when they take a month to clean up their paper?

Or are you perhaps sublimating your own AI anxiety into confrontational assertions that other people who discuss AI aren't as AI-pilled as you?

View on HN

You can delay your own publication as long as you wish to. Bullying somebody else to delay theirs is a different thing entirely.

OpenAI put together an advisory panel to provide guidance on how to release their results. Where do you see bullying?

I'm not sure why you see bullying here? OpenAI has always worked with expert mathematicians; their unit-distance result (https://openai.com/index/model-disproves-discrete-geometry-c...) was a much deeper collaboration. They published the Navier-Stokes result early, to either benchmark or show off their new model depending on how you look at it, and they want to understand more about the negative effects which many mathematicians feel that early publication had.

If the advisory group says something like "AI is bad and nobody should use it in math", I'm pretty confident OpenAI will ignore them.

On UDC, internally they had Alexander Wei, Hongxun Wu, Chen Lijie. TCS people. As gobetweens to Daniel Litt.

On N-S I think nobody internally felt confident enough to publicly step up. So Bubeck had to wing it.

It remains to be seen which of the big names will work with whom inside the org

Reply on news.ycombinator.com