News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Thom's account on an exchange with OpenAI regarding non-sofic groups. Parent comment

Re:Thom's account on an exchange with OpenAI regarding non-s... by munksbeer on Friday September 11, 2026 @07:03AM (#49656356)
Hold on, you've just ignored the point of the post you're responding to. What isn't being received well is hearing that others are close to publishing on a solution to a problem, so quickly using your power imbalance (millions of USD and access to way better models) to front run this. Even if their model wasn't trained on the conversations, this is just a dick thing to do.

That's it, that's why it isn't being received well.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Thom's account on an exchange with OpenAI regarding non-s... by mafuy on Friday September 11, 2026 @08:58AM (#49657694)
It is simply unethical, period. Knowing that a solution exists is a gigantic advantage when working on a solution. Normally, noone can abuse the knowledge fast enough to gain an advantage, but here, they could. This is fraud and as a journal, I would reject it.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Thom's account on an exchange with OpenAI regarding non-s... by fc417fc802 on Friday September 11, 2026 @09:10PM (#49667581)
Actually you're the one ignoring a key point of the post you're responding to. The claim (which granted you might not believe) is that openai understood the problem to have already been solved. They also claim to have been attempting to avoid front running the pending publication as well.
[ Parent | on HN ]