logoalt Hacker News

afavourtoday at 11:21 AM3 repliesview on HN

The core section:

> However, communications quickly became contentious. According to Buckmaster, OpenAI offered to give him sole authorship on the Navier-Stokes solution—but only if Alpöge’s name was removed from the work and if the write-up would acknowledge the problem had been resolved by an internal OpenAI model. Buckmaster refused, in part because he was troubled by the question of what OpenAI's system had actually seen. For example, Buckmaster said the company did not initially give him a clear answer about whether its agents had access to the pair's logs on Codex (which is an OpenAI product).

> OpenAI executives have denied that any employee or AI agent saw the pair’s work before the researchers released it publicly on 7 September. But there still remains a separate question: Could the pair's work have reached OpenAI's models through its training data?

> OpenAI’s blog announcing the Navier-Stokes solution does not dismiss the possibility: “While unlikely, we cannot rule out that de-identified data derived from [Buckmaster and Alpöge’s] usage of our products helped improve our models .”


Replies

huurtehoogtoday at 11:23 AM

So, this company wants everyone and every organization on Earth to use their software, and reserve the right to then tell anyone how the resulting work can be published and credited?

Real solid business model there, how could it ever fail?

show 2 replies
olmo23today at 11:32 AM

> While unlikely, we cannot rule out that de-identified data derived from [Buckmaster and Alpöge’s] usage of our products helped improve our models.

Well yeah, if you use the free product they train on your data, ... I thought this was widely understood?

show 3 replies
JohnKemenytoday at 11:38 AM

> but only if Alpöge’s name was removed

This is blatant scientific misconduct.

show 2 replies