cool stuff modulo local transformations
Palo Alto, CA
- Tweets 181
- Following 170
- Followers 33
- Likes 51
For everyone that thinks they could run a semiconductor company
figureitoutyourself.net/
2
485
One of my favorite little known PCB tools is TopoR - a topological router that models routes like rubber bands.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TopoR
2
59
eth retweeted
tristan buckmaster just published a statement that is, if accurate, one of the ugliest things i’ve read out of a frontier lab.
not because of the math. because of what happened after openai found out two people were about to beat them to the punch.
buckmaster and levent alpöge spent a year pushing the córdoba / martínez-zoroa program to smooth forcing. august 15 they got blowup for boussinesq and 3d euler. lean-verified august 22.
they were paying openai out of pocket and dumping every draft into private codex sessions.
the program is obscure. almost nobody else was on it. this was not “paste the clay problem into a chatbot.”
then this:
> thursday sept 3, buckmaster emails openai privately. rumors are flying. he is trying to stop a mess, not start one.
> they reply the same day: give us details so we can “avoid competing.” also, want free compute?
> sunday they suddenly need a call “at any point today.” sebastien bubeck gets on. levent is not invited.
> openai says an internal model has a ~100-page proof of forced navier–stokes blowup. fefferman options c and d. the exact route buckmaster and alpöge had quietly chosen.
> they show him a prompt and claim the model was “simply given the problem statement.” levent is told “very little human input.”
> that falls apart on the same call. a whole team had been on it. they started on the unforced problem, warmed the model up on easier equations including euler, and even the prompt they showed him was written by prompting codex.
> he asks when the first prompt went out. they stall. then agree: the past few days. after information about his work reached openai.
> he asks whether the model was trained on, or had access to, the private codex sessions where they put every draft of this project.
> answer: the model does not look up user data.
> he asks again. about training.
> no answer.
then it stops being a science story and becomes an hr story.
> offer 1: you post euler. we post navier–stokes the next day.
> offer 2: after you post euler, you alone write the navier–stokes paper, credit our model, and we cut levent.
> bubeck says twice he wants levent removed from authorship because he works at anthropic.
he declines both.
he says if they release it that way, he goes public.
the reply is not a scientific objection.
> “why would you ruin your career?”
> “if you don’t want me to be nice, then i don’t have to be nice.”
later, a text to levent proposing a one-on-one:
> “i don’t know if tristan is being fully rational right now.”
that is not how you treat a collaborator. that is how you split one.
openai got word two researchers were closing a path almost nobody else was on. they spun up a team on that exact path. they would not answer whether the researchers’ unpublished drafts in openai’s product were used. they tried to dictate the announcement order. they tried to remove a coauthor because he works at a competitor.
when that failed, someone reached for a career threat.
this is a lab finding out academics were about to publish, sprinting the same narrow program, refusing the data question, and trying to manage credit around a rival affiliation.
really slimy if even half of this holds.
what the fuck is happening.
holy shit.
tristan buckmaster is saying openai has a forced navier–stokes blowup via the córdoba / martínez-zoroa program.
and that it may have used drafts from his and levent alpöge’s private codex sessions.
that’s the córdoba / martínez-zoroa route. almost nobody else was on it.
he also says the first prompt went out after information about his and levent alpöge’s work reached openai. that “very little human input” was not true. that a whole team had already been set on easier problems, including euler. that even the prompt they showed him was written by prompting codex.
then he asked:
did the model have their private codex sessions.
no answer on training.
if any of that holds, openai didn’t just scoop a math result. they may have done it off two researchers’ unpublished drafts, then tried to cut the coauthor because he works at anthropic.
a millennium-problem-adjacent result just became employee drama before an ipo.
i don’t even know which part is crazier.
this is one of the slimiest things i’ve seen in this industry.
235
2,415
15,228
1,807,535
I strongly dislike how superposition and entanglement is described as “rare” “special” or “exotic” like the base “little sphere” model of a particle which arrises from quantization and wavefunction collapse isn’t the weird thing
1
3
55
I made yet another web GDS viewer
lowenth.al/GDS-Lens/
1
1
10
1,510
Everyone knows you have to turn a USB 3 times before it goes in but USBs greatest trick is when you need a micro you can only find minis and when you need a mini you can only find micros
55
AI still sucks for photonics. Most photonic tapeouts are novel, or similar chips aren’t public so they appear almost nowhere in training data.
1
2
135
Coupa, Borrone, Madera, Buck’s, Alpine Inn ran so Corgi could walk
The goal is audacious: open 100 Corgi Cafes this year around the world.
This is the challenge of a lifetime. It hasn’t been easy...and I wouldn’t want it any other way.
I’m all in. Every city. Every cafe. Whatever it takes.
We’re just getting started. 🐶🧡
1
89
doxxme.net is a legit breath of fresh air in this crumbling fabrication that is the internet
37
a tiny dilution fridge that hits 70 mK in 1.2 hours. pretty cool, might solve a lot of issues - chandeliers can take days to cool down
arxiv.org/abs/2608.18699
1
45
Higher dimensions break your intuition. A radius-1 ball has the most volume at dimension=5, then shrinks toward nothing. Each dimension splits the same fixed radius budget (x_1^2+...+x_n^2 <= 1), so the ball gets thinner in every direction.
1
2
39
