I think it was a pretty questionable thing to do by trying to front-run these researchers even if they didn’t make use of their techniques. The fact that they may have inadvertently “borrowed” their work via training data makes it much worse.

OpenAI’s behavior here — even if you only consider [their] side of the story — was (at best) in bad taste.

Borrowing the work of others to replace them without crediting is the model of current AI companies.

They just used that occurrence as a PR stunt but it isn't worse than the others done at scale every second.

That’s the definition of current LLMs. They have trained “borrowed” on whatever humans have documented digitally and physically (books).

Isn’t that how research works? You build on what others have done. I don’t understand the big deal. I’d rather have the result available sooner than later just to assuage some egos

Strongly agree. And as one of the major AI companies, this is extremely tone deaf. If they saw a human (even if assisted) was making great progress on a major problem then you give them space. You don’t swoop in with millions in token spend to scoop them. There are tons of important problems where humans aren’t making traction - please go solve those.

This is the take I agree.

It is mean spirited but nevertheless sold their model

Yea, strongly agree. I think this is going to back-fire spectacularly. They better start preparing an apology...