OpenAI Solved a Millennium Prize Problem — So Why Is Software Still Buggy?
ziv_ravid · x · 2026-09-09
The author argues the gap comes from verifiability: in formal math, problems and assumptions stay fixed and proofs are machine-checkable, giving a clean, stable task — OpenAI reportedly ran 10,000 agents in parallel on its Millennium Prize result. Software looks similar but lives inside larger systems: unpredictable users, failing devices, changing external systems, and incomplete specs mean passing tests don't guarantee correctness. So scaling agents can't replace understanding of real-world context — which is why better code models won't eliminate programmers, and post-AGI software can still be buggy even as AI cracks decades-old math problems.
More from AGI Musings
- "Change Could Come Any Day": Poster Distrusts OpenAI and Anthropic on Alignment — justalexoki · 2026-09-09
- Reddit debate: why is the skill gap between AI users so enormous? — Ambitious-Prompt-975 · 2026-09-09
- Blogger: San Francisco Is a Civilizational Pivot Point as AGI to ASI Approaches — sudoraohacker · 2026-09-09
- Dev to AI labs: don't build machines that erase human credit — yunta_tsai · 2026-09-09
- MCP Creator: AI Is Now in a High-Compute Regime, Adjust Your Plans — hrishioa · 2026-09-09
- FDA's GenAI medical device paper exposes the accountability gap in AI clinical practice — jonc101x · 2026-09-09