Researcher: OpenAI can't prove training data didn't change results, and 'deep learning isn't a science'
gleech · x · 2026-09-09
Researcher gleech weighs in on OpenAI's training-data controversy with a pointed summary: the likely truth is 'we trained on it automatically, not intentionally, but it didn't alter the result — and we can't prove it because deep learning isn't a science.' Probably true, he argues, and very unfortunate for OpenAI: the company cannot exonerate itself, exposing a structural weakness of deep learning as a non-falsifiable practice.
More from Models
- GPT-6 Astra tops RSI-Exam at 0.5126, 18.4% above GPT-5.6 Sol — HuaxiuYaoML · 2026-09-09
- APEX-Agents 1.1 benchmark update: Claude Fable 5.1 tops leaderboard at 68.6% — amaarora · 2026-09-09
- Frontier labs must shrinkflate the $200 subscription to upsell you to API pricing — StewartalsopIII · 2026-09-09
- User math: peak pricing 2x but base rate better, 252M cache tokens cost just $0.75/day — teortaxesTex · 2026-09-09
- Astra noticeably worse than Sol in long threads, dev finds handoff workaround — jdjohnson · 2026-09-09
- VC communism is over: frontier models on rationing force hard model-choice thinking — StewartalsopIII · 2026-09-09