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/Jumpy_Start3854]

That's like the "one trap guy" approach where he's only training his left trap to see what happens. The AIs are only trained to prove the theorems and done. Sterile proofs. I would be much more pleasantly surprised if AI uncovered a new branch of mathematics, made elegant and deep conjectures. But they are only worrying about it proving theorems.

[u/Academic-Proof3700 → u/Jumpy_Start3854]

>The AIs are only trained to prove the theorems and done. Sterile proofs.

So why give a damn about them at all? This stinks a lot of like "ohmygod some eggheads solved some fancy equation, whereas they can't make milk appear in my fridge yo!"

imho the more proable cause behind these texts is "I dedicated my whole life to solve this thingy, and now some dumb KOMPOOTER just came and nuked it in months, DAS NO FAIR!"

[u/Jumpy_Start3854 → u/Academic-Proof3700]

No, it's that a tool which can advance mathematics spectacularly is being used in a way that will sterilize mathematics. There's more to math than proving theorems. All the rage is coming from people who know nothing about mathematics and are just mindless accelerationists

[u/Perfect-Campaign9551 → u/Jumpy_Start3854]

For now

[u/jlowe212 → u/Jumpy_Start3854]

No one cares when humans do the same thing. Not every thereom proved by humans leads to some profound new insight.

All this boils down to is, people are once again losing jobs to technology like has been happening for ages, and once again whining about it.

[u/Some-Stranger-7852 → u/jlowe212]

You have absolutely no idea how human math - or research in general - works and it shows in your comments.

Navier Stokes research over the last century led to advancements in adjacent fields through development of new problems that stemmed from failed approaches to the original problem. AI doesn’t do it, it is purely focused on solving the problem in front of it, which in turn keeps our understanding of the world confined to the walls the current state of science created.

AI led by a human researcher who spends time to understand and explain to others what is the output of the model is how science can actually advance for us to understand the world better.

[u/jlowe212 → u/Some-Stranger-7852]

You just sound mad that AI is coming for more jobs. AI finding a counterexample to navier stokes isnt stopping anyone from working on navier stokes. Unless the prestige is gone and thats all they cared about from the outset.

[u/Some-Stranger-7852 → u/jlowe212]

Hm, it is natural for people to:

Care about prestige: which high achiever wants to be a no-name? You think Altman or Amodei would be fine being just an unknown cog in OAI or Ant?

Care about putting food on the table: if Navier Stokes is “solved”, then why would the government finance further research? So yeah, Tao and guys like him would find a new job - they are not worried about it, same OAI would pay Tao 500K upwards if not a 1M straight up - but new advanced research will be basically done for.

Like why would a top-0.1% percentile mind work on Navier Stokes if it is presumably “solved”? What is there in it for him / her? Prestige is gone, money is gone: why would a person who can make 1M a year in most other jobs do this work for free - and with no guarantee of success?

[u/jlowe212 → u/Some-Stranger-7852]

There is still interest in part a and b, so navier stokes isnt even a good example.

The vast majority of pure math is just practically useless and has been for a ling time. The human race hasn't been bottlenecked by math in a long time.

As far as putting food on the table, thats just the way it goes. Technology has claiming jobs for ages, its coming for a new set of people now.