That's not my interpretation - that is literally what OpenAI say in that press release.

cman1444 30 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

Even if true, I don't see why this is an issue. Are they not allowed to work on problems others are working on? Did Anthropic get first dibs on this problem? Competition is good. And I don't exactly have tons of sympathy when the other side is just a leading AI lab. It's not like it's some scholar who dedicated his life to this problem.

▲

sobellian 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

The "steal their thunder" is interpretation. What I'm saying is that you believe they solved NS on a lark to bully some other researchers, and that this is not impressive?

▲

HarHarVeryFunny 4 hours ago | parent [-]

What's impressive for a human and for an AI are two different things.

Magnus Carlson had a peak ELO rating of almost 2900.

Would you be impressed with someone with an ELO of 3700?

Would you still be impressed if I told you it was Stockfish?

OpenAI didn't go looking for a tough-for-an-AI problem to solve - they went looking for one that looked like it was easy since it they had heard it had already been solved.

Do you find this impressive?

▲

sobellian 4 hours ago | parent [-]

Yes, Stockfish is genuinely impressive. I would be proud to author Stockfish. You don't think so?

	▲	HarHarVeryFunny 4 hours ago \| parent [-]
		As a developer yes, especially given that it runs on a PC, and DeepBlue in it's day was really more impressive since is used custom ASICs. But, I assume the Stockfish developers aren't comparing themselves to Magnus. Let's see if OpenAI, or someone else, can get these sort of physics/math results out of a desktop PC - that would also be an impressive piece of engineering!