> The house called 1 of your 32 scored numbers: 3%. Blind guessing would average about 3.6 of them (11%). Only 1 of the 206 people in a psychology study was more random than you. The house found you extremely hard to read.

> Maybe instead of screaming you can take this as a chance to level up your engineering.

Probably also sales. System One thinking and other buzzwords will help.

Agh I can't innovate when I have to [checks notes] put the ingredient amounts on the label!!!

Its too hard! We just dont have the technology [flips desk]

Poe’s law here!

I wish more people understand this very clearly instead of hiding behind "democratic values" and other moral lectures.

The same reason why they’re calling this System One thinking. Everyone wants to be seen doing different things and smart ones.

Why did you leave out the entire quote?

> At present, some frontier AI labs are testing advanced mathematical problems on proprietary models that remain inaccessible to the broader scientific community. Our recommendations are formulated with this practical context in mind. However, ideally, they would not do so. We want to state clearly from the start: we do not endorse this practice, and we ask them to stop testing advanced mathematical problems on proprietary models.

To me, the issue is that the models are proprietary which are only accessible to a few people in 2 digits. It's not about progress but access.

Maybe, but it still seems like an excuse. OpenAI has a proprietary model capable of solving these problems and is willing to share the results with the mathematical community. So basically, the ask is to just not use the model and leave the problems unsolved?

The ask is to let mathematicians outside of OpenAI use it, ie. at least wait until the model is released.

I don’t think that’s sufficient. If they want to be good stewards of mathematical research and not just doing marketing, they need to at the very least tell us the datasets and any techniques they used to train this model. IMO that’s probably just as if not more valuable than a dump of un-reviewed results.

They won’t because they don’t care and the only way it got this good is something along the lines of they trained on every mathematician’s codex sessions even if they opted out because they consider the thinking traces or output and metadata fair game.

It's honestly shit marketing that only cultivates spite and erodes their whole brand. This is a total ego trip.

Which mathematicians though? Only fields medalists? Grad students? Any hobbyist wanting access?

These models are too expensive for broad access unfortunately.

ChatGPT pro is accessible to literally anyone who has a job and lives in a developed country.

Literally every single one of these papers was developed with an internal model that not even most OpenAI employees have access to.

Why is this important? Do you not think that at some point, probably sooner rather than later, math researchers across the world will have access to similar capabilities?

This is sort of like discounting putting humans in space because only a few nations have the means to actually do it at the moment.

The work is not having AI poop out these docs the work is validating them and publishing them. OpenAI doesn’t care and wanted to race to publish potential findings and let others review it which is lazy and selfish

It seems success if getting through their heads.

I kind of hope someone does build it, just not exclusively dependant on Cloudflare.

Perhaps cloudflare thinks this is reasonably possible with LLM driven development, however, the devil on this is in the details to hit the production level footprint of something like github. especially if running from scratch.

On brand for Cloudflare which is typically a cheap company.

I’m guessing Western countries have no stake in wars probably.

You have plenty of opportunities you’ve just not been forced to use them. Look into your contracts right now, I bet rhrrr are opportunities