Comment by johnecheck

2 days ago

Would be nice if we actually knew what was done so we could discuss how to judge it.

That recent announcement might just be fluff or might be some real news, depending. We just don't know.

I can't even read into their silence - this is exactly how much OpenAI would share in the totally grifting scenario and in the massive breakthrough scenario.

8 comments

johnecheck

Reply
algorithms432  2 days ago

Well, they deliberately ignored the requests of IMO organizers to not publish AI results for some time (a week?) to not steal the spotlight from the actual participants, so clearly this announcement's purpose is creating hype. Makes me lean more towards the "totally grifting" scenario.

  • bgwalter  2 days ago

    Amazing. Stealing the spotlight from High School students is really quite something.

    I'm glad that Tao has caught on. As an academic it is easy to assume integrity from others but there is no such thing in software big business.

    • bluefirebrand  2 days ago

      > As an academic it is easy to assume integrity from others

      I'm not an academic, but from the outside looking in on academia I don't think academics should be so quick to assume integrity either

      There seems to be a lot of perverse incentives in academia to cheat, cut corners, publish at all costs, etc

  • letmevoteplease  2 days ago

    The source of this claim is a tweet.[1] The tweet screencaps a mathematician who says they talked to an IMO board member who told them "it was the general sense of the Jury and Coordinators that it's rude and inappropriate for AI developers to make announcements about their IMO performances too close to the IMO." This has now morphed into "OpenAI deliberately ignored the requests of IMO organizers to not publish AI results for some time."

    [1] https://x.com/Mihonarium/status/1946880931723194389