As a Nobel Prize winner, I am surprised that you have not noticed how Tao and Gowers were steering everyone in the AI direction for years and now do damage control by nudging everyone to either hypothetical open models paid for by industry or the EU or sitting in a committee that "advises" OpenAI.

No one is saying "Perelman and Wiles didn't need that silly AI and N-S was more of a counterexample". Most people imagine the sky is falling.

What if OpenAI is stalling because they don't have 100 additional unpublished proofs as claimed?

> As a Nobel Prize winner, I am surprised that you have not noticed how Tao and Gowers were steering everyone in the AI direction for years

I did notice, this is why I had thought that they had thought through the consequences. But, unfortunately, it is likely they imagined that AI would plateau somewhere around the "smart undergraduate" level and that they will stay relevant in pure problem solving.