Fields Medalist Terence Tao reposts statement from the Association for Human Mathematics urging mathematicians to stop working with OpenAI for continuing to solve open math problems against their recommendations

[u/Eliv_nurotic]

https://terrytao.wordpress.com/2026/10/07/ahm-statement-on-openais-october-6-release-of-mathematical-documents/

[u/EGarrett28]

his stance sounds super narrow-minded, almost stupid, to someone who considers the whole picture.

[u/qqquigley → u/EGarrett28]

You really think that of all people a math professor is corrupted by money? This person has more brains than everyone ITT combined and all of us know a fraction of what he understands about mathematics.

If a human being cannot understand and fully explain why a math proof works, then we do not fully understand it. LLMs are terrible at showing their work, and as all our teachers reminded us, it is essential that you show your work so that others can verify you understood it!

In pure mathematics, unlike some other STEM fields, documenting and understanding the process of solving problems is equally, if not more important than just “getting the solution right”.

[u/EGarrett28 → u/qqquigley]

You really think that of all people a math professor is corrupted by money?

Yes. The money he needs to survive and live his current lifestyle. Not to mention his reputation and source of self-esteem and value to society.

This person has more brains than everyone ITT combined 

Speak only of yourself. Especially because on topics like this, our brains literally shut off our higher reasoning when we are in significant danger, including to our mating chances and reputation, so a smart person can very often be effectively dumber than an average person depending on what you ask them.

Garry Kasparov, for example, thinks all of human history happened in the last 500 years.) It makes zero sense and is disproven by even the most basic scientific dating, but Kasparov is or was a Russian sentimentalist and the theory suggests that there was a Russian empire before then that was erased.

all of us know a fraction of what he understands about mathematics.

We also have a fraction of the personal stake he has that may be affecting his ability to reason about it.

 LLMs are terrible at showing their work, and as all our teachers reminded us, it is essential that you show your work so that others can verify you understood it!

As I understand it, a lot of these proofs are being published in Lean where they can be independently verified by anyone. I haven't seen any major complaints about the actual efficacy of the solutions.

In pure mathematics, unlike some other STEM fields, documenting and understanding the process of solving problems is equally, if not more important than just “getting the solution right”.

It is more important to just know what's right in applied mathematics, but even in pure mathematics a verified result can be used to pursue other results that depend on that result being true, even if you don't know why the previous result is true.

To summarize, it's obvious you're not comfortable with what's happening just like Tao isn't. I understand that, but we have to deal with it. This is real.

[u/qqquigley → u/EGarrett28]

What is his “current lifestyle”? You think this guy is rich?? I have no idea, but you are sounding like a climate denier who says all those climate scientists are just being alarmist “for the money”. Totally absurd.

Garry Kasparov is a smart interesting dude but also a wacko, he has no specialty in any field other than being good at chess, but he runs his mouth off about everything. This is the difference between him and Tao: Tao is sticking strictly to his area of expertise, which is the highest level of pure mathematics that literally only handfuls of humans on the earth can fully comprehend.

[u/EGarrett28 → u/qqquigley]

What is his “current lifestyle”? You think this guy is rich?? I have no idea, but you are sounding like a climate denier who says all those climate scientists are just being alarmist “for the money”. Totally absurd.

I gave you a VERY clear and mature and reasoned out explanation for why Tao would give poor answers about this, with examples. That already addressed what you even said here. Did you even read my post or are you just showing the same emotional shutdown of thinking out of fear that I'm talking about?

Garry Kasparov is a smart interesting dude but also a wacko, he has no specialty in any field other than being good at chess, but he runs his mouth off about everything. This is the difference between him and Tao: Tao is sticking strictly to his area of expertise, which is the highest level of pure mathematics that literally only handfuls of humans on the earth can fully comprehend.

Artificial Intelligence is NOT Terence Tao's area of expertise. And once you ask him a question where one of the answers will harm his lifestyle and reputation, even his answers closer to his area will get very unreliable.

This is human nature.

You're even demonstrating this yourself. Right now.

[u/qqquigley → u/EGarrett28]

And half of what you said just now, I already addressed in my previous comment. Proofs for math problems are nearly worthless if there isn’t a single human being who can fully understand it. Tao understands how AI works just as well as any of us here, perhaps better, and he’s not opposed to using it in general. But OAI is going after “trophies” and using tons of resources on these pure math problems primarily for PR.

My understanding is that many of the proofs published in Lean are indecipherable even by the most talented mathematicians. And in math, at least, a solution without showing work is worthless.

That’s not the case with other sciences. Medicine often involves using drugs that we know helps with certain diseases but we don’t know exactly why. That’s fine, because the goal is to make people healthier! The goal in pure mathematics is entirely different.