Discussion
Today, Levent Alpöge and I have made public three results: finite-time blowup with smooth forcing for incompressible porous media, for Boussinesq, and for 3d incompressible Euler.
https://cims.nyu.edu/~tristanb/statement.pdf
https://cims.nyu.edu/~tristanb/euler.pdf
https://cims.nyu.edu/~tristanb/ipm.pdf
I want to again express my profound gratitude to the outpouring of support from the greater mathematical community. I also want to remark that there is a far bigger story here than the one in my statement: the sheer magnitude of what frontier models can now do, and what that means for us all. I hope the labs can see this and set the petty posturing aside.
"Since August 28 we have been training a new internal model that has exhibited unprecedented performance in our benchmarks, including mathematics. This model’s training is ongoing and its performance continues to improve."
Note that they are openly admitting they used training data from a period after we found our result. Is it ethical to use customer's data to try to scoop their customer?
@tristanbuckmaster If you use an unethical product, this result is called "comeuppance".
"I asked when the first prompt had been sent by them. This question was not answered directly by OpenAI for some time. Eventually it was agreed that it had been sent in the past few days, after information about our work had reached OpenAI.
I asked whether the model had been trained on, or had access to, our sessions in Codex, into which we had been putting all our drafts for the whole of this project. I was told the model did not look up user data. I asked again, about training, and I did not get an answer."
There would be little doubt in my mind that they would have access. These companies have zero scruples.
You may not wish to hear this, but it's the price you will pay for selling your soul to the devil. The devil will keep you to the bargain.
Install bonfire.cafe
Get the full app experience
@tristanbuckmaster Reposting what I said on the Lean Zulip chat: Whether or not they cheated, isn't it a basic ethical principle with conflicts of interest that it's necessary to avoid the **appearance** of impropriety? That makes it a conflict of interest for OpenAI to both provide AI services for use in scientific research and to compete in research on the same problems or in the same fields, regardless of whether in fact confidential customer data is being used to compete with those customers. The fact that such conflicts are common in various kinds of marketplaces (providing a marketplace for third parties and also selling one's own competing products in that marketplace) doesn't make it any more ethical.