> Someone asked him what he thought of the AI proof. Justin said he didn’t know. He hadn’t read the paper yet. He said he’d been “too busy.”

> That astonished me. Too busy to look at a problem he had been dreaming about for 19 years? “I am genuinely busy and probably wouldn’t be able to get to reading a human’s proof immediately either,” he told me afterward, by email. “It does not help that AI does not write mathematics particularly well.”

Given:

* The human mathematicians can't solve the problems.

* The slop engine can't write well enough to make its purported solutions readable by human mathematicians.

* Sam Altman is a frivolous liar.

How is it possible to know whether the problems have been solved at all?