this post was submitted on 07 Sep 2026
19 points (100.0% liked)
TechTakes
2690 readers
463 users here now
Big brain tech dude got yet another clueless take over at HackerNews etc? Here's the place to vent. Orange site, VC foolishness, all welcome.
This is not debate club. Unless it’s amusing debate.
For actually-good tech, you want our NotAwfulTech community
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Looks like there might be a bit of an openai vs anthropic dick waving competition over mathematical proofs. I haven’t had time to digest all of this yet because it is a bit hard for me to read, but there are a few interesting nuggets in there such as making it clear that the ai firms treat this as a marketing exercise (no surprises there). They’re also apparently trying to obscure the amount of human assistance involved (again, no surprises).
The main statement is here: https://cims.nyu.edu/~tristanb/statement.pdf
Associated stuff linked from here: https://mastodon.social/@tristanbuckmaster/117233413705701198
Do note that the author made heavy use of llm assistance for their work, and does consider it to be the future of developing mathematical proofs… this isn’t human vs ai.
The /r/singularity and orange site responses have been gross, lots of commenters willing to totally overlook the multiple different ways OpenAI has been utter scum in this debacle in order to celebrate another LLM "success".
there are tons of issues here. almost impossible to convey how bad things are. in no particular order:
this research breakthrough was a consequence of dumping tons of money into the ai companies. if the future of the field means being entangled with openai et al. and extreme expenses that is going to upend mathematics in a much bigger way than ability to prove new things will. this hasn't been a focal point of discussion yet but it looks to be at the center of mathematics going forward imo.
possibly for legal reasons, the statement stops short of accusing openai of stealing their in progress work. as in literally snaking their documents off the cloud and using them to try to undercut researchers. but it's very clear that that is what the author believes happened
openai straight up threatened the mathematician in question. in a colloquial sense they're engaging in extortion. apparently this is so routine for them that they didn't even stop to consider that they can't threaten an academic's career (or they assumed the mathematician would understand there will be no academic careers in the future)
openai is straight up lying about their research methods. there are various ways that their announcements have had the potential to be misleading (for example when you see "we spent $2000 to compute these proofs" ask how much they spent on attempts that didn't work). but what they're saying may generally just not be true even in a literal sense
OpenAI:
https://blacksky.community/profile/did:plc:i4bfh2tyxihe2ksplmtcoopk/post/3muznyls6vk2v
of course lol, gotta keep that agi ruse up
The progression from 'the alleged novel parts were actually already in the training data' to 'we just stole them from some guy's chatbot logs' has been nothing if not organic.
You don't say.
@supersquirrel@lemmy.ca I suppose this is a score for you apropos our recent discussion on industrial espionage. Although I'll note that the domain they tried to take over this time (dickwaving with math proofs) does also not have a business model, so they're not really working themselves out of their financial death sentence.
Also hard to feel like a point for me when that atrocious Meta settlement with the attorney generals that basically locks in profits via regulatory capture just came out...
As someone from the US it feels like a nuclear missile pointed at the fediverse...
Glad to see that OpenAI has not changed in their scummy ways. Despite all that has changed in the meantime, they have kept their time-honored tradition of passing off other people's work as their own.
One of OpenAI's math announcements a month ago claimed that their results cost only $2000 worth of tokens, which frustrated me because they were likely sweeping away many inconvenient details and almost certainly misrepresenting their true costs. But people took this as a gotcha. This is the same bullshit as the water usage arguments. We are literally seeing city council members signing motherfucking NDAs about this, and you think that water usage numbers provided by the tech companies themselves are going to sway me?
I am also questioning OpenAI's strategy of strip-mining math for PR, since it seems like advances in math do not actually register that well in the public. From what I remember, the Hugging Face incident got a lot more press than any of the math results.
They want to sell the claim that they've "achieved AGI". For the general public they can sell on the vibe of "the computer talks back to you", but for more sophisticated audiences, they need something firmer. Everyone with even a fraction of the ability to think for themselves has stopped trusting benchmarks, so OpenAI and Anthropic has been looking for things associated with intelligence they can claim success on. Math proofs have the property of being somewhat automatically checkable, having lots of ideas scattered throughout the literature to let their LLMs sift through, and being associated with intelligence.
And the bonus advantage of an academic community of which a sizable fraction is willing to burn leaded gasoline to truck the child laborers into the sweatshop to paint asbestos with radium, if it'll get them arXiv posts.
yeah I think the push for math results is because they know some of their big investors know enough about how hard/advanced math is and they want to impress them. Burning down an entire academic community is worth it for that
Deleting this for now as I don’t have time to rewrite it properly, but I’m sure someone else will do a better job of the plagiarism/training on private data stuff that I’ve missed.
what? that is absolutely not true. ill try to address this on my lunch break but it is way more serious than that