@RyanKidd They clearly state that FrontierMath was a project commissioned by OpenAI. https://epoch.ai/blog/openai-and-frontiermath (which makes me think that your story isn't very accurate, let me know if I'm confused)
More to the point, it seems very backwards to me to take Epoch AI secretly doing commissioned work for OpenAI without letting the contributors know as a reason to give more funding for Epoch AI. Some thoughts
"Roughly 75% of our funding comes from Open Philanthropy. The rest comes from individual donors, organizations such as Survival and Flourishing Fund, or from service agreements with collaborators on projects aligned with our mission." They're choosing not to mention industry funding on their Manifund. I feel like they're not very trustworthy in being transparent in their communication. Are they 75% OpenPhil funded?
Tamay has tweeted that the holdout set was independently funded (https://x.com/tamaybes/status/1870047603901247876) but Epoch AI says that OpenAI owns the holdout set (https://epoch.ai/blog/openai-and-frontiermath). This is all very confusing (and again, we don't fully know about Epoch AI funding) but I feel like if your story of more Epoch AI funding reducing reliance on commercial partners worked well, then nothing that was publicly communicated to be independently funded would ever be later revealed as owned by OpenAI.
They were happy to do a big project that was secretly commissioned by OpenAI, without communicating this to the 70+ mathematicians. In this comment section Jaime Sevilla says that going forward, they plan to continue collaborating with OpenAI. What in this situation makes you think they have intention to reduce industry collaboration if they get bigger?
If a project would otherwise be funded by OpenAI, then you're probably not having great counterfactual impact by donating there.