I replied to a different comment with an explanation as to why I do not perceive Tao as a gatekeeper; in short that his current beat seems to be entirely about expanding understanding and access to math by improving the communication of opaque proofs, which we will shortly have a near infinite supply of due to AI.
I will also mention that he maintains a realistic, clear eyed attitude with respect to the inevitability of AI in math, while being sensitive to its disruptive nature in his field. Everything here strikes me as constructing a thoughtful, grounded way forward for his community.
I'm sure there will be missteps along the way, but I think Tao is overall an excellent example of maintaining a balanced position between the poles of absolutism that seem to capture so many.
I am curious where you interpret this as gatekeeping behavior.
I will also mention that he maintains a realistic, clear eyed attitude with respect to the inevitability of AI in math, while being sensitive to its disruptive nature in his field. Everything here strikes me as constructing a thoughtful, grounded way forward for his community.
I'm sure there will be missteps along the way, but I think Tao is overall an excellent example of maintaining a balanced position between the poles of absolutism that seem to capture so many.
I am curious where you interpret this as gatekeeping behavior.