Presumably it's mainly the better model, I don't see much evidence of a particularly advanced harness based on the reasoning traces that they provided.
I'm going to guess the ability to hold a million individual details in an attention space at once, compared to the typical human capacity for about six or seven
Crazy how all these problems were simultaneously on the precipice of being solved before ScoopenAI (I came up with that) stole their work. The rate that mathematicians have suddenly made progress is only bested by the rate that OAI has ramped up their theft haha it's nuts. Good thing it'll never get better at explaining ideas though (since they're all stolen) so there'll still be that.
The fact that this is plausible should be deeply disturbing and disqualifying for openAI. The fact that they may prevail and win is a travesty of our failed system.
Disqualifying for what? If you develop a proof you aren’t competing for something, you’re expanding the frontier of knowledge. It’s a binary state of the world, either it’s proven or not. Prevail and win what exactly?
Trillions of dollars might be a bit of an advantage.
Probably the model OAI used that is strictly better than whichever SOTA - 3 months model OP used?
Presumably it's mainly the better model, I don't see much evidence of a particularly advanced harness based on the reasoning traces that they provided.
That’s what I was wondering. Thanks.
Their internal model is allegedly like 4x as capable as the publicly available ones
I'm going to guess the ability to hold a million individual details in an attention space at once, compared to the typical human capacity for about six or seven
They ingested all of his sessions with their SOTA models from a few months ago. ;)
Crazy how all these problems were simultaneously on the precipice of being solved before ScoopenAI (I came up with that) stole their work. The rate that mathematicians have suddenly made progress is only bested by the rate that OAI has ramped up their theft haha it's nuts. Good thing it'll never get better at explaining ideas though (since they're all stolen) so there'll still be that.
The fact that this is plausible should be deeply disturbing and disqualifying for openAI. The fact that they may prevail and win is a travesty of our failed system.
What does "win" mean? There is no prize for this, and having someone discover a proof benefits us all.
The prize is a tenure for the researcher, and in OpenAI's case, a higher valuation when they IPO?
In this case, the tenure is gone, and OpenAI has increased their valuation
Sure there is. A job, tenure, professional respect, Fields medal.
Disqualifying for what? If you develop a proof you aren’t competing for something, you’re expanding the frontier of knowledge. It’s a binary state of the world, either it’s proven or not. Prevail and win what exactly?