That Proof Was Downstream of Mathematicians' Chats — but Is 'Direct Training' Even Real?
shaurizard · x · 2026-09-10
Responding in the thread about labs using frontier mathematicians' chats, shaurizard concedes the data was valuable — as he understands it, the recent proof was downstream of those earlier discussions — but questions the 'direct training' framing: he believes the information reached the model, not the way people describe it. He doesn't object to the tactics since the data was given voluntarily, but argues anyone with real objections should protest the right approach.
Related event: OpenAI Claims Navier-Stokes Breakthrough, Sparking Authorship Dispute(465 posts)→
More from AGI Musings
- Anti-AI Hysteria Will Kill More People Than AI Ever Will, Argues Commenter — JHochderffer · 2026-09-10
- Anthropic pretraining researcher quits, says OpenAI and Anthropic are gambling on self-improving superintelligence — alejandroll10 · 2026-09-10
- How AI is breaking the internet economy: new report dissects agent payments and x402 — kleffew94 · 2026-09-10
- Matt Shumer: The People Building AI Are Scared — We Still Have a Chance to Get This Right — mattshumer_ · 2026-09-10
- 'Exterminate' Was a High Bar: Critics Flag Motte-and-Bailey in AI Safety Rhetoric — inductionheads · 2026-09-10
- Claude formalizes Fermat's Last Theorem in Lean: 13M lines, 11 days, ~29,500 theorems — anirbanbandyo · 2026-09-10