Please don't sneer on HN. The guidelines make it clear we're trying for something better here. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

The point is human understanding. If the LLMs understand, but the humans don’t, where does that leave humanity? Building things we don’t understand is a sure path to facing consequences we can’t predict.

Your comment also conveniently ignores the plagiarism aspect of it all. Who is coping here?

What benefit is there if the machine has unlocked understanding but no human has? What incentives are there for humans to learn and gain such understanding from machines?

Not quite, all the proofs or disproofs so far AFAIK were using existing methods that humans developed and were already using to attack the problems, but AI is just more thorough. What AI can't do currently is develop new mathematical methods to attack problems that can't be solved with existing methods and AFAIK there is no known path to get current gen AI to do so.

The biggest cope is buying OpenAI's "We can't prove we didn't plagiarize"

Apparently, we have AGI that can solve Millennium Prize problems but can't trace simple data flows lol.