It has no capacity to think, argue, demonstrate, or certainly do anything even remotely close to “intelligence”

That’s the whole issue: it’s not knowledge, it’s data. AI can not provide an account for the proofs, or be questioned about them, or organize a talk exposing the idea because there’s no understanding behind any of it.

This is what Tao has been saying; that the results, in the strictest sense, were never the goal. It is ultimately the understanding (that previously was required to form a proof) that is valuable.

That is why I find the prospect of spoiling the plot without warning to be bad taste and didn’t finish the article.