C.G. FEWSTON

American Novelist

[Netflix @netflix]

LONESOME DOVE, the Pulitzer Prize-winning Western classic by Larry McMurtry, is coming to Netflix as a new series from East of Eden showrunners Zoe Kazan and Jeb Stuart.

[C.G. FEWSTON @cgfewston]

Ready for the Experience & Fun, @grok & @imagine

[C.G. FEWSTON @cgfewston]

✍🏻️ final edits for my new #novel #Cowboy 🤠

🙏 coming soon on Christmas Day 📚 📖

#writerscommunity #writerslife #bookcommunity #authors
#novelist #cgfewston #westerns
#cowboyup #cowboylife #westernbooks

[Katie Miller @KatieMiller]

OpenAI is stealing credit done by other people and other models.

Sound familiar?

Sebastien is just following the company culture created by Sam Altman.

Once a thief, always a thief.

[Carles Sáez @csaez_math]

In case anyone still doubt it, this is the confimation that everytthing in Tristan's statement is true.
Sad day for mathematics

[Elon Musk @elonmusk]

@growing_daniel 😂

[Gary Marcus @GaryMarcus]

OMG. I guess we have our answer from OpenAI

“we stole it fair and square”

Not one goddamn mention in the tweet of the human mathematicans they were in communication with, and whom they may well have ripped off.

[Read https://t.co/Z5osESGAUk for what OpenAI did not admit in the tweet.]

Absolutely disgusting.

[C.G. FEWSTON @cgfewston]

#writerslife

[Elon Musk @elonmusk]

@wholemars They just percolate in their own bitterness all day

[Formula 1 @F1]

Checking in at MADRING 👋🇪🇸

Let's do this! 🤩

#F1 #SpanishGP

[C.G. FEWSTON @cgfewston]

Ouch

[Jay Cummings @LongFormMath]

I...worked on this proof for a year...and...they just…tweeted it out.

[Jay Cummings @LongFormMath]

I...worked on this proof for a year...and...they just…tweeted it out.

[Ryan Orhan @rynorhn]

tristan buckmaster just published a statement that is, if accurate, one of the ugliest things i’ve read out of a frontier lab.

not because of the math. because of what happened after openai found out two people were about to beat them to the punch.

buckmaster and levent alpöge spent a year pushing the córdoba / martínez-zoroa program to smooth forcing. august 15 they got blowup for boussinesq and 3d euler. lean-verified august 22.

they were paying openai out of pocket and dumping every draft into private codex sessions.

the program is obscure. almost nobody else was on it. this was not “paste the clay problem into a chatbot.”

then this:

> thursday sept 3, buckmaster emails openai privately. rumors are flying. he is trying to stop a mess, not start one.

> they reply the same day: give us details so we can “avoid competing.” also, want free compute?

> sunday they suddenly need a call “at any point today.” sebastien bubeck gets on. levent is not invited.

> openai says an internal model has a ~100-page proof of forced navier–stokes blowup. fefferman options c and d. the exact route buckmaster and alpöge had quietly chosen.

> they show him a prompt and claim the model was “simply given the problem statement.” levent is told “very little human input.”

> that falls apart on the same call. a whole team had been on it. they started on the unforced problem, warmed the model up on easier equations including euler, and even the prompt they showed him was written by prompting codex.

> he asks when the first prompt went out. they stall. then agree: the past few days. after information about his work reached openai.

> he asks whether the model was trained on, or had access to, the private codex sessions where they put every draft of this project.

> answer: the model does not look up user data.

> he asks again. about training.

> no answer.

then it stops being a science story and becomes an hr story.

> offer 1: you post euler. we post navier–stokes the next day.

> offer 2: after you post euler, you alone write the navier–stokes paper, credit our model, and we cut levent.

> bubeck says twice he wants levent removed from authorship because he works at anthropic.

he declines both.

he says if they release it that way, he goes public.

the reply is not a scientific objection.

> “why would you ruin your career?”

> “if you don’t want me to be nice, then i don’t have to be nice.”

later, a text to levent proposing a one-on-one:

> “i don’t know if tristan is being fully rational right now.”

that is not how you treat a collaborator. that is how you split one.

openai got word two researchers were closing a path almost nobody else was on. they spun up a team on that exact path. they would not answer whether the researchers’ unpublished drafts in openai’s product were used. they tried to dictate the announcement order. they tried to remove a coauthor because he works at a competitor.

when that failed, someone reached for a career threat.

this is a lab finding out academics were about to publish, sprinting the same narrow program, refusing the data question, and trying to manage credit around a rival affiliation.

really slimy if even half of this holds.

what the fuck is happening.

[Spencer Pratt @spencerpratt]

UC Irvine lecturer teases killing Nick Shirley ahead of the anniversary of the assassination of Charlie Kirk.

We have a communist violence problem.

Right on the heels of the UCSB communist professor encouraging students to train with weapons for violent revolution. Our universities have been completely infected with violent communists who are pumping this insanity into the soft heads of your children.

These violent animals are not redeemable. Their minds are gone. Clearly "UC" now stands for "Unhinged Communists".

[Enrique @enriquegtejeda]

Subes tu artículo o tesis a ChatGPT para que “corrija” la ortografía.

Tiempo después, un investigador en otro país publica tu trabajo. ChatGPT se lo sugirió cuando utilizó tus datos como entrenamiento.

[Elon Musk @elonmusk]

True

[Liza Libes @pensandpoison]

What a shame that we've created a culture where "long" is synonymous with "bad."

The best books I've ever read in my life—The Brothers Karamazov, The Magic Mountain, Anna Karenina, Bleak House, Middlemarch—are all in the 700-900 page range. In fact, I'd go so far as to say that that range is the sweet spot for a literary masterpiece.

Our culture's obsession with editing writing down to a "manageable" length has led us all to fall under the collective delusion that just because something can be cut down, it ought to be cut down—and that side plots and digressions are simply evidence of "bad writing."

Please make it stop.

[Formula 1 @F1]

Touching down on home soil 🇪🇸

It's @alo_oficial and @Carlossainz55's home Grand Prix this weekend, and their first at the Madring 🙌

#F1 #SpanishGP

[Advait @advait_jayant]

This is insane.

OpenAI could be keeping an eye on scientists’ prompts, tracking when someone seems close to a major breakthrough, and then putting its own team on the same problem using ideas from those conversations.

This would let OpenAI get to the result first, steal credit, and use the achievement to improve its public image and stay ahead of Anthropic.

[Haseeb Qureshi ＞|＜ @hosseeb]

You're missing the core drama of the story: Tristan is softly accusing OpenAI of having stolen their result from Codex chat logs.

Tristan then claims OpenAI tried to threaten him to not publicly disclose this, and that they'd give him the Clay Prize ($1M) as the "closest humans to the problem" if he'd agree to disavow his co-author, @__alpoge__ , who is at Anthropic.

This is HBO-level drama, but with math proofs.