Good post, it perfectly captures the problem with AI. Here we have a claim that the double cover conjecture has a proof. Verified by… no one per the link.
Now imagine this proof is wrong. How would you know? Ok, think about the process in which you determine the correctness - why not do that initially?
And there it is. The problem laid bare. Ironically it reduces to the P and NP one.
Most likely they wrote the proof in Lean and had it verified by a computer
I mean, if you've watched the past decade, this just seems like what news is today. "people are saying the double cover conjecture has a proof"
You seem to be suggesting that it is just as hard to understand an existing proof to a problem, than to solve it yourself? I don't follow your argument at all, what are you trying to say?