[wging]

Who's to say that there's going to be a single 'ultimate interpreter' of the proof? If it's a community effort do we pull a Time Magazine and say everyone proved it... oh, and I guess Shin Mochizuki helped.

This whole article is just kind of silly. The fact that we don't understand it is a fact about ourselves, not about Mochizuki's reasoning. The argument is meaningful and correct or it isn't, and our perceptions of it are secondary to the thing itself.

[rizzom5000]

I have to agree with this. There is a lot of discussion about this proof, and also with the idea that the reasoning that leads to it may reveal new insight.

There is little to gain by lamenting the potential difficulty of verification by pointing out your interpretation of the accessibility of previous famous proof attempts.