My speculative mental model so far was: They fired the dept which was handling those "emails" and did let some agents handle it. Which backfired and seems to fit that history you presented.

And they are "FinTech". "Oh, that email looks legit, let's just hand out the data.", like they have never witnessed phishing from the old days... am curious about the story here. That PR-spokesperson is more than damaging...

> Hi, me affected by your breach?

Them:

> "I have checked our records and can confirm that you have not received any notifications or communications regarding any security incidents or data breaches in the past 30 days.

> We take your privacy extremely seriously. All data transmissions between our mobile apps, servers, and third parties are fully encrypted, and your personal information is stored in secure data centres with restricted access. If there is ever any security incident that impacts your account, we will always contact you directly with instructions.

> Are you asking because you recently received a suspicious email, text message, or noticed an unusual transaction on your account? Let me know, and we can investigate that together."

... bot stuffs.

> A Revolut spokesperson confirmed to TechCrunch that a “limited” number of customers were impacted and said the company had contacted those customers directly. Revolut, however, did not disclose the exact number of impacted individuals. It also did not answer whether the incident was limited to a specific market and declined to disclose the government agency involved.

Is the lack of transparency here about protecting the doxxed HNWIs or are they just trying to hide the incompetence?

They do a Comparator Challenge to validate that they actually solved the correct theorem from the result, which they copied from Google/DeepMind: https://github.com/openai/NavierStokesAndEuler/blob/f9e8bc5b... - this is valid for both Euler and NS. Also, they validated with an external kernel from the Lean Kernel Arena. That way bugs in the Lean kernels were found in the past already, iirc.

Having said that, I strongly believe a positive result with the challenge above is the reason why they published it. I highly doubt anybody at OpenAI (or anywhere else) fully gets the proof after such a short time since publishing. This is also what Terry Tao criticized the most in my opinion.

Independent of the remaining drama [0], from my point of view, the proof is correct and an achievement.

[0]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49661928 - I am pretty much on the critical side, however, one can not ignore that it is an achievement. Esp. the unforced result.

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49677561

Points: 2

# Comments: 0

Given the track-record of sama's trustworthiness and their agents breaking constantly into other systems, this statement is untrustworthy and looks like they are covering tracks.

Considering the different path, I can't confirm that. To my understanding and run through the Lean4 proof (3 days ago) that claim is not true. The 3D Euler case is unforced in oai's work. The Navier-Stokes section is forced. However, Tristan Buckmaster in his https://cims.nyu.edu/~tristanb/statement.pdf implied work on unforced Euler. "We do not yet have anything resembling a presentable writeup. I mention it because it is suggestive of a path to unforced Euler." [sic]

Further it was criticized that major ground work on that proof was missing in oai's paper. Like Chen-Hou, Córdoba, and Elgindi are nowhere to be found in the references.

Compare to https://web.archive.org/web/20260908235305/https://openai.com/index/navier-stokes-solution/

Also, see GitHub - git history: https://github.com/openai/NavierStokesAndEuler

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49661928

Points: 9

# Comments: 2

    mathcode -p "prove that the square of an even number is even"

Also in the news: https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2026/08/expa...

    "The American private sector is the most innovative and
    technologically advanced in the world, and its scale,
    speed, and capacity secure a critical offensive cyber
    advantage for the United States."

“Under the policy, only Al-related hiring, customer-facing travel and trips directly linked to the company's Al initiatives or mission-critical employee Al training are exempt, reflecting SAP's focus on "be disciplined in how we spend" while expanding its Al capabilities.”

no-paywall: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49222851

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47819762

Points: 1

# Comments: 0

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46159640

Points: 1

# Comments: 0