OpenAI's claimed Millennium Prize result used roughly 10,000 agents on a problem that was, as one entrepreneur on Moonshots put it, unusually easy to specify. The panel's argument: as the price of that kind of compute falls, the scarce skill becomes writing the target — and today's models, asked for ten ideas to cure cancer, produce a bad list.
After OpenAI claimed a result on one of mathematics' Millennium Prize problems, Sam Altman called it "the strongest evidence yet" for pacing progress. On Moonshots with Peter Diamandis, the panel treated that as the start of an argument rather than the end of one: a reported researcher resignation, competing estimates of catastrophic risk, and a demand that the labs publish benchmarks for alignment instead of another model.
OpenAI said on 8 September that an internal model, running roughly 10,000 agents for 88 hours, produced a forced blowup construction for the Navier–Stokes equations and a machine-checked proof of it. On Moonshots with Peter Diamandis, the panel worked through what the result is — a statement about idealized fluids, not a device — what it cost, and why the credit for it was contested within hours.