Comment by gettingoverit

That said, I missed the slight semantic difference between "being funded by" and "owning", even though I don't see how that would be different in practice.

Regarding the second point, I don't see how "hav[ing] a verbal agreement that these materials will not be used in model training" would actually discourage someone from not doing it, because breaking that kind of verbal agreement wouldn't cause any harm.

I have not been aware of those other claims on Twitter, but IMO they do not create sufficient basis for an investor fraud case either, because Twitter is not an official way of communcating to investors, which means they can claim whatever they want there. IANAL though.

I'm really looking for FrontierMath-level problems to be solvable by OpenAI models, and being able to validate it myself, yet I don't have much hope it will happen during my lifetime.