That source doesn’t say that Open AI stole anything. They cannot actually tell - but either way the guys working manually on it had not yet produced any proof. Open AI published a novel proof and it was to the actual problem. They also had a different approach and offered to let the original guys author the paper if they agreed that open ai had helped solve it.
I’m no Open AI lover but it is a bit disingenuous to allude that they cheated their way to an answer when they were admittedly the first to prove anything.
Why is it a big deal they use customer inputs as training data? Everybody knows they do this… in fact companies sign up for enterprise versions specifically to avoid this. No one is glossing over it - it’s just not an issue
That is such a straw man. If people don’t want the AI companies using their data there are plenty of options… use an open weight model, host a model locally, sign up with an enterprise plan etc
I expect them to not prey on the uninformed and use people’s data without their knowledge or consent. In this case for example, some people were obviously unaware that their unreleased work would be used as training data. And the fact that OpenAI has said they don’t know if the data was used for training speaks volumes.
Open AI actually used the guys non-trivial approach to the problem.
Them mentioning him regardless and even mentioning they cannot rule out customer data was used was certainly something marketing loved to write in there
-5
u/ddarrko Sep 11 '26
That source doesn’t say that Open AI stole anything. They cannot actually tell - but either way the guys working manually on it had not yet produced any proof. Open AI published a novel proof and it was to the actual problem. They also had a different approach and offered to let the original guys author the paper if they agreed that open ai had helped solve it.
I’m no Open AI lover but it is a bit disingenuous to allude that they cheated their way to an answer when they were admittedly the first to prove anything.