While I'm generally pretty negative on claims that the labs are 'scamming' the public with misrepresentations of model capabilities, it's hard to see how this wouldn't qualify.

- the OpenAI researchers claimed that they had "just told it to work on the problem" with little human input

- in fact, they had a whole team working on it

- and used, among other things, the work of third party human researchers to drive the work

- then threatened? a researcher who tried to go against theit planned narrative

Just from this document (which is of course only one side of the story) it really sounds like OpenAI was hoping to publish and say "we just told the model to try harder and it solved a Millennium problem!". Not great if true.

This part in particular was especially egregious:

> I said that if OpenAI released its result in the way proposed I would go public with what happened. The reply was, “Why would you ruin your career?” I replied that I am an academic, and asked why he thought going public would ruin my career. The reply was, “If you don’t want me to be nice, then I don’t have to be nice.”