Thread

1. measurablefunc · 1790048681 · focus · HN ↗

   Why don't they just publish the results? What does an advisory group do in this case when none of the members can validate or verify any of the purported solutions?

   1. pred_ · 1790064812 · focus · HN ↗

      Because they apparently lack the internal compentencies to do so (or, given that they now have a Fields medalist on payroll, it's probably more a case of not feeling any need whatsoever to spend the effort it takes; maths isn't exactly profitable if you can't mine it for PR). Ignoring all the ethical violations they made in the process, the fact that they only ever released slop on the Navier–Stokes problem is part of the debacle.

      For example, had they decided to put their paper on arXiv, they would be facing a 1 year ban, followed by not being able to put anything on there without prior peer review.

      1. oliculipolicula · 1790078431 · focus · HN ↗

         More: after OAI've mangled whatever value is left of the results (once again), HN could start braying for the training data/weights. Or even the prompts

         Sashas of the world, unite!

         Gerko, to donate GPUs for openweight serving

         Elbakyan, to release some gpt7 related torrents

         Others? Wei?

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.