[Barrin92]

It's extremely complicated. The original document he wrote up was 500 pages of maths introducing effectively an entirely new theory. I studied number theory in uni, tried to read it, and understood barely anything of it.

Which obviously leads to the epistemological problem that the article points out. You had extremely good mathematicians like Scholze look at it and thought he found a flaw, then one guy from Arizona disagreeing that it is a fatal flaw and claiming to have fixed it, which Scholze doesn't agree with.

So what do you really make of it if only a handful of mathematicians can engage with it, and they can't even agree with each other. Probably the biggest value of IUT is that it puts to the test what even counts as a proof.

[BobaFloutist]

It kind of introduces a fun thought experiment, of a super high-level, complex equivalent of the Monty Hall Problem (which is so counterintuitive that even very intelligent and mathematically literate people will outright refuse to accept the established truth). How would we ever establish truth on something so monstrously complicated that only ~10-100 people in the world could possibly understand and at the same time so divisive that there cannot be a strong consensus?