No. Or rather not to any meaningful degree or depth. They can do very shallow reasoning only and after a few steps into deeper reasoning chains, only noise is left. Statistical AI is completely unsuitable for automated deduction. It is not even remotely comparable to what a smart human or even the very limited automatic theorem proving systems can do.

Yes. While this may be hard to understand for non-mathematicians, the data-theft angle could not be any more obvious. All LLM type AI can to is put puzzle pieces together. Somebody else needs to create those. And if they were unpublished, then they were stolen.

It does not actually make a useful contribution. It does damage. And the allegation of most of this stuff essentially being stolen are very likely true.

I am with Roger Penrose on this: Quantum theory is wrong. Saying it is "incomplete" is just a more polite form of saying it is wrong. Now, you do not abandon theories you know are wrong unless you have better ones. But you always remember they are wrong and you are careful not to make sweeping predictions based on them.

Yes. It takes a certain level of sophistication to overcome this effect. Some people have it. Many do not and for some of those it is completely out of reach.

You cannot force people to be fair or respectful or "good". You can only refuse to associate with those that are not.

There is also another aspect that makes this experiment bogus: Ordinary people do not decide about the pay of others in actual reality. It is a lot more complicated. This stinks of somebody trying very hard to find a specific problem.

At this time, the pay gap is below the error of measurement. Yes, sexism continues to be a problem especially as a specific type of women tries to compensate for lower misogynism by doing as much misandrism as they can. But there will always be plenty of stupid people (of all genders) around that try to elevate themselves that way. But the pay gap, the restrictions in education and political power and the restrictions on what work you can do, dependent on gender, are basically gone. Trying to create a victim narrative on what is left makes the people doing it part of the problem.

Obviously, you cannot have it all. You cannot, for example, be the person to primarily raise your children and have a full career. There is just not enough time in a day to do that. But, and that is perhaps the biggest sign this problem is solved on the level of western society, is that in particular women can decide to not have children and still be full members of society. Obviously, most religious fuckups are deeply unhappy with that and try to fight it, but these people should not be listened to concerning anything anyways.

Because compensating for factors like experience, female experts currently get paid slightly more (!) than male ones with the same qualifications. That does not fit the victim-narrative though.

No, it cannot do real work. It can steal work where the last 5% were still missing. It cannot do the other 95% and the ones that did them just got robbed of their well-deserved success. That is a very bad thing.

Because most of these were things that actual mathematicians had been working towards for decades. Now their results have been stolen. And, obviously, without all the work they have done, "AI" would not have had any chance in hell to get these results. What this will do is that mathematicians will become secretive (harming the field) and many people that wanted to go into the field will go elsewhere (harming the field). Great job.

The LLM assholes essentially accepted huge damage to society for a somewhat moderate gain on their side. That is one of the definitions of "evil".

You know what you sound like? Exactly the type of victim that Broadcom build most of their business model on.

Have you met young people that intentionally became Windows admins? Or the windows admins (the legitimate ones) you can hire out of, say, India? My guess is with your history, you probably have not.

No argument from me that you get dumb Unix admins as well.

I had a very important word in there: "most". You may want to think about the implication of that word for a singular case. You clearly need to improve your reading comprehension skills.

The cost for all the negative side-effects is already larger than any potential benefits can ever be.

Probably because people are stupid and inflexible. Well. Looks like Broadcom knows the idiots they are exploiting very well.