I think most people here get that this is the point?

The point beyond this one is that an AI proof doesn’t prevent humans from working on the problem, it destroys the current economic incentive to work on the problem. Perhaps we should rethink the current incentives. In order to make money as a chess player, you don’t need to beat AI, or ban AI from playing chess.

If mathematics took a similar approach (we don’t get paid for solving net-new problems, we get paid for enriching human understanding), then there’s no issue.