I find it so ridiculous that they (seemingly) forcefully try to state references to dedicated researchers who devoted much of their lives to the problem, while the LLM does not even know which trained papers were effectively used. That means likely many researchers not listed were heavily influencing this achievement, and Claude does not even know that they helped. And the world doesn't know.

▲

howunfortunate 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

This happens in academia all the time. You read a ton of papers, chat with tons of people about tons of ideas.

Later you come up some idea, you do the experiment, write the paper, search for relevant citations when you write the intro.

Honestly I think this is actually desirable. For a mind to work well and do things creatively and efficiently it can't be a simple search engine, it needs to blend and meld and reform the information.

And that means the output can't be cleanly deterministically linked to the input. Unless you just keep a log then cite everything you've ever read in your life (and all the conversations and talks too).

	▲	edelbitter an hour ago \| parent [-]
		This is the reason why this is desirable for humans. But I do not like extending excuses that apply to human (limitations) also to companies that could keep a log.

▲

baggy_trough 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Sounds entirely reasonable to me. They tried to give some credit. The main contribution is the solution that Claude came up with.

▲

nicce 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Maybe someone already figured it out, but it is well covered somewhere. And Claude just used it. I wonder if we ever know for sure.

▲

whizzter 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Claude seems to be fairly good at bruteforcing/testing/etc on it's own, it solved a fairly intricate thing while I was busy on other things.

I've adapted a crypto-lib for TLS connections and had a mistake during negotation that truncated some algo-selection value, worked up until the other party started trialling post-quantum algorthims that apparently had algo-id's that collided with the truncated values I was using.

Claude figured out that from the code and trialling TLS handshakes.

Besides, since there was a bounty on finding the curve it seems unlikely that someone would've found out and not shared that? (unless working at a security service that figured out that it was possible to attack?)

▲

tonfa 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Wouldn't they have claimed the bounty?

	▲	nicce 4 hours ago \| parent [-]
		If they thought it to be backdoor, why not sell for some other believer who pays more than the bounty? But anyway, not everyone is after money and fame.

▲

I_am_tiberius 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

> The main contribution is the solution that Claude came up with.

That's an argument that must be infuriating to all researchers who ever published a paper on that topic, because most likely Claude was trained with all of them.

	▲	baggy_trough 4 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		I suppose so, but it's still the case.
	▲	lp92 3 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		How is that any different from a human that learned from another researcher or paper?