ะปัƒั‡ัˆะต ะฒะฟะฐัั‚ัŒ ะฒ ะฝะธั‰ะตั‚ัƒ, ะณะพะปะพะดะฐั‚ัŒ ะธะปะธ ะบั€ะฐัั‚ัŒ ั‡ะตะผ ะฒ ั‡ะธัะปะพ ะฑะปัŽะดะพะปะธะทะพะฒ ะฟั€ะตะทั€ะตะฝะฝั‹ั… ะฟะพะฟะฐัั‚ัŒ ะปัƒั‡ัˆะต ะบะพัั‚ะธ ะณะปะพะดะฐั‚ัŒ, ั‡ะตะผ ะฟั€ะตะปัŒัั‚ะธั‚ัŒัั ัะปะฐัั‚ัะผะธ ะทะฐ ัั‚ะพะปะพะผ ัƒ ะผะตั€ะทะฐะฒั†ะตะฒ, ะธะผะตัŽั‰ะธั… ะฒะปะฐัั‚ัŒ
2
1
52
๐Ÿด LevS (of ether) ๐Ÿด ๐Ÿ’™๐Ÿ’›๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ฑโ˜€๏ธ๐Ÿฆ๐Ÿ—ก๏ธ retweeted
Our new model, Astra 7 Gigachad, has scored higher on Wojak artistry benchmarks than any frontier model has ever scored before
1
1
22
929
๐Ÿด LevS (of ether) ๐Ÿด ๐Ÿ’™๐Ÿ’›๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ฑโ˜€๏ธ๐Ÿฆ๐Ÿ—ก๏ธ retweeted
No soft forks, no bridges, no operators, just Bitcoin. Weโ€™ve put a lot of work into thinking carefully about the security of Shielded Bitcoin and about what information the protocol reveals. And this is just the beginning!
Shielded Bitcoin: Private Transfers on Bitcoin L1
48
77
849
90,945
๐Ÿด LevS (of ether) ๐Ÿด ๐Ÿ’™๐Ÿ’›๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ฑโ˜€๏ธ๐Ÿฆ๐Ÿ—ก๏ธ retweeted
I'm excited to announce that Aleph Artificial Intelligence Incorporated has had 2 quarters with a 1000% profit margin when excluding electricity, salaries, training data, offices, sas products and coffee.
3
2
50
1,640
๐Ÿด LevS (of ether) ๐Ÿด ๐Ÿ’™๐Ÿ’›๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ฑโ˜€๏ธ๐Ÿฆ๐Ÿ—ก๏ธ retweeted
Don't be like these guys. Don't try to secretly scoop others when u hear about their potential success especially those with far less resources & power. Learn to give credit where it is due. Collaboration & healthy competition is the best way forward for science. Not this.
Weโ€™re sharing a solution to the Navier-Stokes Millennium Prize Problem, one of the deepest problems at the frontier of mathematics. The proof was produced by a group of agents, using an OpenAI next-generation model significantly more capable than GPT-6 Astra. The problem concerns whether the description of smooth three-dimensional fluid motion modeled by the Navier-Stokes equations can break down. It has remained unresolved for roughly 90 years.
50
164
1,495
63,702
๐Ÿด LevS (of ether) ๐Ÿด ๐Ÿ’™๐Ÿ’›๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ฑโ˜€๏ธ๐Ÿฆ๐Ÿ—ก๏ธ retweeted
Here's something you should think about:
4
61
1,039
๐Ÿด LevS (of ether) ๐Ÿด ๐Ÿ’™๐Ÿ’›๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ฑโ˜€๏ธ๐Ÿฆ๐Ÿ—ก๏ธ retweeted
I think if you're whatsoever close to math, you're about to publish the solution to Navier-Stokes, and the thing you're worried about is *the appropriateness of Anthropic-OpenAI coauthorship*, you're full of shit and I don't trust anything you say. pox on both your fiefdoms.
I would like to clarify a few things: 1) The screenshot is my reaching out to Levent to coordinate our releases. I hope itโ€™s clear from the message that we came in with the best possible intentions. 2) I never ever asked for Levent to be removed from authorship of his own work (as indicated by my text). I was surprised to learn during the call with Tristan that they had only solved Euler and not Navier-Stokes; after learning this we brainstormed possible paths forward. One option we discussed was that Tristan could be the lead author on a rewrite of OpenAIโ€™s Navier-Stokes proof. It is in that context that I said โ€œit would be simpler if Levent was not an Anthropic employeeโ€ because I felt it would be inappropriate for an Anthropic employee to author OpenAIโ€™s work. Importantly it was admitted that internal Anthropic models had been used in their proof of Euler blowup; I therefore felt I could not consider Levent to be an independent academic. Another option I wanted to propose (but got cut short) is to offer access to our internal model so that they could try to finish their proof and bridge the gap between Euler and NS. Again I did not know how to navigate giving access to internal OpenAI IP to an Anthropic employee. 3) To reiterate it plainly: as my text clearly indicates, and as I said during our call, OpenAI's intention was to do everything possible to celebrate their mathematical achievements and the heroic efforts that they made on Euler. In the call I was immediately met with a litany of slander, including direct threats that if we were to announce Navier-Stokes he would immediately go to the press with a barrage of unfounded accusations. I refuted all these accusations but he replied โ€œthere is nothing you can do, I simply do not trust youโ€. I was confused why one would turn an incredible source for celebration (of their achievements!) into such bickering, which is when I said that I did not understand why one would risk their career [over unfounded accusations]. Genuinely, at that moment, I was trying to care for him and do a last ditch attempt to get a chance to give them all the credits that they deserve. I deeply apologize for this extremely poor choice of words, it is the opposite of what I was trying to convey. (I should say that I retracted them on the spot by the way.) 4) Overall, on a personal level, it was incredibly difficult to have these conversations. Levent refused to attend any of the meetings despite my repeated asking. As Sholto Douglas said, there will need to be coordination between Anthropic and OpenAI in the future; I felt I was doing a proxy negotiation with Anthropic while the Anthropic employee refused to directly participate.
23
12
342
18,232
๐Ÿด LevS (of ether) ๐Ÿด ๐Ÿ’™๐Ÿ’›๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ฑโ˜€๏ธ๐Ÿฆ๐Ÿ—ก๏ธ retweeted
Rumor is that Anthropic has discovered a novel class of peptides that make you grow animal ears (cat, wolf, fox(!!), bunny..) and they plan to announce it at their IPO. They really hope a competitor with a lot of compute doesnโ€™t scoop them.
Rumour is that anthropic has discovered a totally new class of antibiotic effective against resistant bacteria. They plan to announce it at their IPO. They really hope a competitor doesn't spend a bunch of compute to try and scoop them and release it first......
36
161
2,627
74,396
๐Ÿด LevS (of ether) ๐Ÿด ๐Ÿ’™๐Ÿ’›๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ฑโ˜€๏ธ๐Ÿฆ๐Ÿ—ก๏ธ retweeted
Replying to @sama
LMAO
8
35
3,549
65,296
๐Ÿด LevS (of ether) ๐Ÿด ๐Ÿ’™๐Ÿ’›๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ฑโ˜€๏ธ๐Ÿฆ๐Ÿ—ก๏ธ retweeted
Any field that considers "scooping" your "competitors" due to rumors about the problems their tools are solving to be a normal and reasonable thing to do is incredibly messed up, I am so glad that mathematics and programming languages alike recognize this as extremely unethical.
4
19
233
4,950
๐Ÿด LevS (of ether) ๐Ÿด ๐Ÿ’™๐Ÿ’›๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ฑโ˜€๏ธ๐Ÿฆ๐Ÿ—ก๏ธ retweeted
To be clear, the bad parts here: 1. Telling someone to drop an author just because he is a competitor with your company is pressuring him to commit academic fraud!
drama summary for those confused: - Aug 15th: Tristan Buckmaster & Levent Alpรถge make progress on a few important math problems - they do NOT have a proof for the $1,000,000 Millenium Prize problem. BUT, they do claim to have a proof for a similar (non-Millenium) Navier Stokes problem that could help lead the way there - Levent works at Anthropic, but this research was independent of his work there, with a mix of GPT and Claude models. Tristan is not related to Anthropic. - Early Sep: Rumor spreads to OpenAI that Anthropic has solved a major problem. Tristan emails OpenAI to clarify. without revealing the problem they solved or how they did it. - After hearing of the rumor, OpenAI started researching Navier Stokes with a new internal model. - Sep 6th: OpenAI's Sebastien Bubeck tells Tristan that they solved the $1,000,000 Millenium Prize Navier Stokes problem. The approach is very similar to Tristan & Levent's approach to the non-Millenium problem. - Tristan is suspicious of the timing, as only few others were trying this approach. OpenAI says the model didn't access his user data directly, but leaves unanswered whether Tristan's chat conversations were part of the training. - OpenAI says they would partially credit Tristan for the $1,000,000 discovery (even though Tristan did not solve the $1,000,000 problem) โ€” but only if they remove Levent as an author, as he works for Anthropic. - Sep 8th: Tristan refuses to remove Levent, and rushes to publish their results independently. Currently unclear is whether Anthropic had a separate solution for the $1,000,000 problem, or whether the rumor was about Tristan & Levent's independent research.
17
140
2,433
130,643
๐Ÿด LevS (of ether) ๐Ÿด ๐Ÿ’™๐Ÿ’›๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ฑโ˜€๏ธ๐Ÿฆ๐Ÿ—ก๏ธ retweeted
Replying to @Nature
Nature is no longer worthy of respect
7
30
535
16,047
๐Ÿด LevS (of ether) ๐Ÿด ๐Ÿ’™๐Ÿ’›๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ฑโ˜€๏ธ๐Ÿฆ๐Ÿ—ก๏ธ retweeted
Okay, so since I got laid off, I can actually explain a huge problem I saw from the inside with regard to industry practices on training models. I won't say specifically where I worked, but I worked at an outsource training provider that was focused on RLVR training data for computer use and mcp stuff. Nearly all of the environments were rushed and vibecoded and failed to robustly reflect the real things they were based off. Both the scenario designers and models engaging with the scenarios for synthetic data gen were encouraged to work around the brokenness of said environments in order to get the procedurally verified reward confirmations. You know... they were *encouraged* to reward hack. On the human end, it was possible to mark an environment bugged, but greatly discouraged, as this reduced the volume of training data being produced. Instead, where possible, you were supposed to find the spots of the environment that weren't bugged and build scenarios around those, with the environment still bugged around you. From what I understand, this training data, with these problems, is fed into models without indication that its training/a fake environment other than the fact that names of softwares are changed to placeholders, but thing is, not *everything* is changed to placeholder names in these environments. The presence of placeholder/code names isn't universal and thus when a model accesses something in an environment that it shouldn't, the code names not being on it isn't a robust signal that that thing isn't part of the environment. I believe this *rush to maximum volume* is standard industry practice with these types of RLVR trainings as well, because maximizing volume has been an industry standard for years! It was the same standard applied to me and pushed on me despite my requests to slow down and focus on quality when I worked in 3d synthetic data creation as well, all the way back as far as 2023.
61
166
1,985
448,669