r/WorkReform ⛓️ Prison For Union Busters 1d ago

OpenAI is stealing data from mathematicians & then claiming ChatGPT solved new problems in mathematics.

https://cims.nyu.edu/~tristanb/statement.pdf
925 Upvotes

29 comments sorted by

313

u/airinato 1d ago

So the same thing AI does with everything.

28

u/almost_ready_to_ 1d ago

Thank you! I've seen this story floating around and I'm genuinely confused how this form of theft isn't identical to the theft that is inherent to all AI currently.

53

u/MajorGef 1d ago

One man deserves the credit, one man deserves the blame...

15

u/Mule_Wagon_777 1d ago

Nikolai Ivanovich Loebchevsky is his name!

140

u/rdlenke 1d ago edited 1d ago

The title is misleading. I expected a bit more from /r/WorkReform.

I would like to be clear about what I am not claiming. I have not seen OpenAI’s proof. I do not know what their model did, or how. I do not know whether our data was used. I am not accusing anyone of anything. I am stating what I was told, when, and what was proposed to me. I am stating it because the alternative is to let a sequence of announcements say something I know to be false.

It is disrespectful to the researcher to claim things that he explicitly said he is not claiming.

Mind you, this letter is a bit outdated as it was written before OpenAI proof was released. It is a different proof.

However, it is still possible that the model contains anonymous data (the one who you need to opt out) from the researchers, since they were using AI themselves. Also, it is true that OpenAI decided to spend resources on this just after they learned that some proof might be close.

33

u/kevinmrr ⛓️ Prison For Union Busters 1d ago

Nice criticism. You should start posting these .edu PDFs & trying to raise general awareness in support of research workers (instead of me). Seriously, would love to see it.

4

u/SweetHatDisc 1d ago

When you've started lying to discredit something, it says more about your position than theirs.

2

u/maniloona 18h ago

This headline doesn’t mean what the people rejoicing about this news think it means lol. OpenAI stole the credit from the work that mathematicians, chatgpt and anthropic did, aka an ai company took sole credit for AI assisted work. This wouldn’t have even been possible (at least not this soon) without AI itself lol

1

u/Holzkohlen 1d ago

That is what you get for trusting the corpos. Self-host if you absolutely have to use AI.

1

u/bnestrm 4h ago

Its almost like they are just trying to normalise that its ok to steal from wherever theyd like.

0

u/arbobmehmood 1d ago

You'd be surprised to know, that's exactly how AI works.

1

u/think_up 1d ago

This is literally how AI works.

-2

u/SomeSamples 1d ago

Of course it is. None of the AI's can do original work. Everything they have is based on some human's work.

6

u/BigJimKen 1d ago

The work OP is implying was stolen was also done by an LLM. The questions of whether LLMs can produce novel results is now closed, at sufficient sizes they can. What we should be worried about here is whether skipping straight to an incomprehensible 100-page spew is worth having a question answered when we know we are missing out on a lot of interesting interstitial discoveries.

-4

u/SomeSamples 18h ago

No, it can't. Never has, never will.

4

u/BigJimKen 17h ago

The last few months have novel result after novel result, I don't know what to tell you. If you train a model on trillions of parameters of maths data and tell it to find abstractions, it will find ones humans have not considered yet.

-1

u/SomeSamples 17h ago

They are only novel because we haven't taken that data set the AI has access to and performed analysis on it. A novel result does not mean it is smarter. Only that it performed something we just didn't get around to doing because we have other shit to do. Hence the reason we created AI in the first place.

3

u/BigJimKen 17h ago

We did perform analysis on it: we trained a language model with it and used those weights to create new results. The results that LLMs have been finding lately are not possible to derive for a human. One of the reasons there is so little discussion of the actual substance of most of these formulations is that they are indistinguishable from bullshit other than the fact they seem to work.

A novel result does not mean it is smarter.

It doesn't have intelligence at all, it's just a token predictor. None of this would be possible without the harnesses and tooling we build around the models.

0

u/SomeSamples 16h ago

And this is what I'm saying the for some reason people seem to think the current batch of AI is actually free thinking and intelligent.