I am not sure. The people who actually care enough to look at benchmarks will run evals, and find out quickly. If you post silly benchmark scores too often, you will simply be ignored. You are paying with your reputation.

Equality is not a prerequisite for everyone to be better off (and please do note that this is not me saying I prefer inequality. That would be an entirely separate sentence.)

We can and should have it as something that people do in the future because we have the resources for everyone to do so.

Where did OpenAI, or anyone, claim that?

noooooooo

For multiple parties, probably mostly OpenAI (which is, of course, as it should be). I would assume the people involved in investigating, cleaning up and coordinating the outfall do not do it for free or cheaply, and neither is the infrastructure required to run this operation.

If it was not mostly OpenAI, or if OpenAI failed to cooperate, we would probably see a lot more lawsuits already.

> "Free marketing" seems like a more relevant characterization.

Yes, nothing screams free marketing quite like an AI company losing control of their AI. The public has been ecstatic in response.

If you want to define consequences as exactly "not being charged", maybe that is correct in this case (so far). But a fairly wonky definition of "consequences" would be required to support this broad claim.

What?

The questions we asked were originally not about math. They were about a thing that we invented maths for to do or explain, a question that existed, because it touched us in some way that was already real to us. There is nothing that would not allow this to happen in the future. All this requires is attention and connection to the world around us. The maths required to answer our questions can be done and developed by something else.

To me, all you need to believe for this to be true is to agree that understanding maths is also not a stated requirement of reality to get a thing, if something else understands the maths (or something that does the same job). This is demonstrated by billions of people who do not understand maths and get things that, currently, require other people to understand the maths.

But the last part is entirely optional as it pertains to reality. That's just the best we can currently do (and in some important sense it is holding us back as a species, and in some other sense doing the opposite).

If that goal is understanding math, you certainly will be able to understand maths, more than ever before.

If that goal is something that required you to understand maths first in the past, you won't have to do that anymore.