antirez rebuts Terence Tao: AI proofs add to math knowledge, not subtract from it
antirez · x · 2026-09-09
Redis creator antirez published a thread systematically rebutting Terence Tao's concern that AI-generated math could be a net negative for mathematics:
- "Net negative" is factually false: after a proof or disproof we strictly know more; no opaque process shrinks the set of knowledge.
- Proofs are studyable objects, not oracles: they can be read, decomposed and simplified, and math has always turned long, inelegant proofs into understandable ones.
- New techniques will still emerge: Fermat and Poincaré spurred new methods, and there's no reason AI would exclude developing new techniques for studying and simplifying proofs.
- The math community won't leave proofs unstudied: if Tao's stance isn't an extreme minority position, generated proofs will be examined in depth, producing real math results; closed companies can only add to mathematics, never remove.
- Conclusion: AI's ability to produce super-human math in certain areas is now clear, and authority alone doesn't guarantee correctness — remember "Stochastic Parrots".
More from AGI Musings
- Dev cheers AI disrupting math academia: r/math bans AI threads, "scooping" claims are nonsense — ctjlewis · 2026-09-09
- Safety researcher calls for scientific scrutiny of assumptions behind p(doom) claims — sebkrier · 2026-09-09
- Interrogating the beliefs behind "10% chance everyone dies" AI doom claims — lucasmeijer · 2026-09-09
- Math Is Really About Manipulating Intuitions, Not Symbol Manipulation — mjdramstead · 2026-09-09
- AI agents change code economics: maybe nobody needs to understand all the code — Genaforvena · 2026-09-09
- Reviewer says 3 of 4 EMNLP submissions were obvious AI slop, some got accept votes — artetxem · 2026-09-09