Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hasn’t this been the case for human-made proofs too? For example, Andrew Wiles’s famous proof touched a number of different, barely-related mathematical fields that no single person could allegedly peer-review it on their own. That was in the 1990s.
No there were a few people that could. And in principle, if Andrew Wiles did it, others could too and were motivated to do it. What I'm saying is that people will be conditioned to explore less on their own with tools like this and thus fewer and fewer will bother understanding the proofs. Math is getting very specialized it's true, and I think that's part of the motivation to use AI. The specialization is itself a b…
This applies to a lot of scientific and practical (like construction) topics in general. Everyone relies on someone else (or something else) knowing what to do.