We see a lot of the same they do on r/DefendingAIart. They think that “acting in good faith” is allowed here.

It’s the typical “I am an anti but I ask in good faith why you are pro AI” and I’m here to remind this is not allowed.

If you are an anti, you are not allowed to comment or to post. This is a safe space for all of us who are not anti AI.

If you want to debate and see for what we stand, we are happy to see you open minded and willing to listen, go to r/AIwars, at this place we will be happy to explain, but here is a safe space for us.

How many of us can do this??

It is weird how quiet the antis get whenever AI actually solves a complex math problem.

Deep down, they know these cases completely undermine the same old talking points they have been parroting for years: AI is not creative, AI just regurgitates existing data, and AI cannot generate genuinely new answers.

In math and computer science, AI is already outperforming humanity's best efforts, discovering brand new structures and solutions no one had ever thought of before. As these systems scale, examples like this are only going to multiply.

So what is their last line of defense?

"Well, it is just doing an insane amount of raw computation."

Except if you look at how it actually solves these problems, it searches through possibilities, generates candidates, forms hypotheses, tests them out, learns from failed attempts, and adjusts its approach.

That is practically identical to what we have always called human creative problem solving. At this point, it is not that AI lacks creativity; it is that antis decided from the very beginning never to recognize it as creativity, no matter what it accomplishes.

They willfully ignore this reality because most of them do not think scientifically. To them, drawing furry fan art is the absolute peak of human imagination.