This dude has issues, the reddit post in /r/MachineLearning top comment:
> Yes, basically. Delete any kyegomez link on sight. He namesquats recent papers for the clout, though the code never actually runs, much less replicates the paper results. We've had problems in /r/mlscaling with people unwittingly linking his garbage - we haven't bothered to set up an Automod rule, though.
Also this part from the reply before editing it away:
They get mad that my repo and code is better than their's and they published they paper, they feel entitled even though I reproduced the entire paper based on 4 phrases, dfs, bfs (search algos), generate solutions, and generate thoughts and this is it. I didn't even read the full paper when I first started to implement it.
The reason they want people to unstar my repo is because they are jealous that they made a mistake by not sharing the code when they published the paper as real scientists would do. If you do not publish your code as a AI research scientists you are a heretic, as your work cannot be tried and tested.
and the code works amazingly much better than theirs, I looked at their code and couldn't figure out how to run it for hours, as well as other people have reported the same.
the motivations are jealously, self hatred, guilt, envy, inferiority complex, ego, and much more psychographic principles.
New research paper drop or go viral > create a repo with AI code > post it in social media. Users star a repo to bookmark it. The few who test the code write in the issue section and get their issue closed with no replies.
Thats why some subreddits flagged these name squatters.
I think a lot of people use stars as a kind of bookmark, not for recognition. It takes time to read through the code or set up a working build from a fork. I, for one, occasionally use stars to remind myself to return to a repo for a more thorough look (especially if I'm on mobile at the time).
I would be pretty astonished if the complainer manages to get the trademark they think they have on "swarms" enforced. People have been using the word "swarm" in connection with simulations of various kinds for as long as I have been interested in simulations (I mean I think I first heard the word swarm in connection with a simulation in relation to something done by the santa fe institute in the 80s if memory serves correctly - it's been a long time).[1]
Most likely outcome is if they try to actually pursue this they lose their "trademark" and the costs drive them out of business.
