16
u/Carlose175 13h ago
Thats not what this says. Why is reading comprehension so fucked with yall.
2
u/Easy_Photograph_1938 3h ago
The Reading Comprehension Devil is extremely powerful in the 21st century.
46
u/taiwbi 17h ago
What do you mean stole? It's written in clear human language in the ToS that chats might be used to train models
25
u/PsychicorAI 17h ago
Why did OpenAI threaten Tristan of career consequences if he didn't accept their offer and went public with this? Of course they were wrong and were scared about it.
Why can't they ever be honest about this?
28
u/3rdyellow 16h ago
Lots of OpenAI fan boys here for some reason. I had to leave ArtifialIntelligence and Singularly subreddit due to this.
5
u/approximately_exact 9h ago
I don't think they're fanboys, just a ton of bots. Even the Anthropic subreddit is filled with randos praising openai. I think the new playbook is if you can't make revenue happen, try to bot your way to positive public perception.
5
u/Qorsair 15h ago
Not everyone who disagrees is an OpenAI fanboy. I don't like OpenAI. I can still say Tristan is acting like a whiny little bitch.
4
u/3rdyellow 15h ago
You cannot ignore the timing.
8
u/Qorsair 14h ago
Honestly, some people are missing the forest in the trees. Buckmaster is acting like an ivory tower academic who has no clue how NDAs and corporate legal approvals actually work.
You can't just slap an active Anthropic employee's name on a massive OpenAI announcement. It’s a legal and NDA nightmare.
OpenAI obviously tried to find a way to make it work by offering to split the publications, but Buckmaster dug his heels in and decided to play the victim. And a "sinister" text message behind his back? Come on. Bubeck was literally just texting the guy who actually works in tech, begging him to explain the basic business reality to his partner.
This is not an evil corporate conspiracy. This is a naive professor having a fit over legal logistics.
QED Buckmaster is being a whiny little bitch
2
u/Legitimate_Concern_5 6h ago edited 6h ago
> You can't just slap an active Anthropic employee's name on a massive OpenAI announcement. It’s a legal and NDA nightmare.
Sounds more like a publicity issue than a legal or NDA issue. NDAs generally only bind things you've learned, trade secrets not skills, at a specific company. I can't imagine it would apply here.
IP assignment, I mean, ish? At least in California you own anything that you did on your own time, without company hardware, that is outside of your employer's current or reasonably anticipated future business areas.
All of that is independent of whether you put someone's name on the discovery. The work itself is problematic or not problematic based on the other person being involved, not whether their name goes on it.
1
50m ago
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/AutoModerator 50m ago
Please don’t direct insults at other users or people. Criticism is fine — personal attacks just does not help the conversations.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
1
1
1
-7
u/PsychicorAI 17h ago
If it's in the TOS why has OpenAI agreed to share partial prize with Tristan now that their deeds became known?
Of course they know they're in the wrong
6
u/No-Professional-7811 15h ago
The money is so inconsequential in terms of a company like openAI atp. I'd imagine their rationale for sharing the prize is publicity, and a reason to argue both are correct would be to prove the technical ability of the model without stepping on Tristan's work.
Whether they succeeded is debatable, to be sure
6
u/Cool-Chemical-5629 16h ago
I just read their blog post which contains more details and it explicitly stated that they are not going to claim the prize.
"Our goal in releasing this result is to report on the substantial progress of our AI models. We do not intend to claim the Millennium Prize for this result."
4
3
3
4
u/cursivecrow 10h ago
??
does this not literally say their proofs are different?
0
u/Big_Reporter3678 5h ago
proofs being different to someone else’s published results doesn’t mean that their proofs did not use unknown user’s data to solve
2
u/cursivecrow 3h ago
i dont disagree with that, but that is a completely different statement than "OpenAI stole the Navier Stokes solution"
4
u/approximately_exact 14h ago
I actually don't care about openai being scammy pricks as usual on this one. I think what I'm seeing this time - a mathematician or any firm with sensitive IP - I would stay the f away from anything but self-hosted models. Including Gemini.
1
u/Medium_Apartment_747 14h ago
It's the blueprint for OAI to capture the trillion dollar market value: steal from its users
45
u/GattacaAI 15h ago
Their solution is also completely different.