Start free trial

TRUE, BUTScope Swap

No independent check of the proofs yet

Its own text says researchers haven't independently verified the proofs, and Anthropic says its own result says nothing about solving formulas in practice.

“An AI breakthrough has made decades of computer science research irrelevant.”

WIRED headline (29 October 2026), on OpenAI's and Anthropic's claimed refutations of the Exponential Time Hypothesis

16 receipts4 support4 refute8 context

Issue 6131 October 20263 min
Scientists with magnifying glasses climb toward a robot's flag on a book stack.
AI illustration

Members · 30 days free

See what the evidence actually shows.

Members read the full check on every story: what the evidence shows, why it matters to you and the one line to take with you. Every past edition, re-verified, and the Receipts Pack come with it. A$89 a year, about A$0.24 a day.

What members getAlready a member? Sign in →
  1. At sign-up: 30 days free. Payment card required. One introductory trial per customer.
  2. Your trial ends 30 days after you start. Unless you cancel before then in Account → Manage subscription, we charge A$89 for the first year. It renews automatically at A$89/yr until cancelled.
  3. You can ask for a full refund within 14 days after any annual payment, renewals included, with no reason needed, by emailing [email protected]. This voluntary refund does not limit your rights under the Australian Consumer Law.

By starting your trial, you agree to the Terms.

Inferno Tech Pty Ltd t/a BS Killer, ABN 27 647 413 474

The twist

Fortnow writes that ETH failing does not make its implications false.

10^10,000Variables before Anthropic's method beats brute force
50Papers Lokshtanov estimates become pointless or need a revisit
27Years since the hypothesis was introduced in 1999
2Labs claiming a refutation: OpenAI and Anthropic

There’s more to this story.

Membership opens the full investigation, the strongest counterargument and what to do with what you’ve learned.

30 days free, then A$89 a year. Payment card required. Cancel before the trial ends to avoid the first charge.

Start free trial →
  1. At sign-up: 30 days free. Payment card required. One introductory trial per customer.
  2. Your trial ends 30 days after you start. Unless you cancel before then in Account → Manage subscription, we charge A$89 for the first year. It renews automatically at A$89/yr until cancelled.
  3. You can ask for a full refund within 14 days after any annual payment, renewals included, with no reason needed, by emailing [email protected]. This voluntary refund does not limit your rights under the Australian Consumer Law.

By starting your trial, you agree to the Terms.

Inferno Tech Pty Ltd t/a BS Killer, ABN 27 647 413 474

Already a member? Sign in

The trick has a name

We call it Scope Swap: applies to far less than it sounds like. You'll see it again. Learn to spot it →

Say this in tomorrow's meeting“AI may have refuted a big hypothesis, and that matters to theorists. Researchers haven't verified it yet, Anthropic says its result changes nothing in practice, and its implications aren't automatically false.”

Receipts

  1. Supports wired.com: An AI Breakthrough Has Made Decades of Computer Science Research ‘Irrelevant’
  2. Supports wired.com: after AI showed that a 27-year-old hypothesis underpinning it is wrong
  3. Supports wired.com: As far as I can tell, it’s now all irrelevant
  4. Context wired.com: UC Santa Barbara professor Daniel Lokshtanov plans to join the effort
  5. Context wired.com: Thore Husfeldt, head of the algorithms research group at the IT University of Copenhagen
  6. Context wired.com: had spent most of this year thinking about one single problem in his subfield
  7. Refutes wired.com: Researchers haven’t independently verified, let alone had time to fully understand, the AI-produced proofs
  8. Context wired.com: make around 50 of his published papers either “pointless” or in need of a revisit
  9. Context wired.com: While this particular result doesn’t directly affect cryptography
  10. Refutes raw.githubusercontent.com: The result is purely asymptotic and says nothing about solving formulas in practice.
  11. Context raw.githubusercontent.com: Lean checks the proofs, but no machine checks that this file says what the paper says
  12. Supports blog.computationalcomplexity.org: I have not verified the proof myself, but it is safe to assume now that the exponential-time hypothesis is toast.
  13. Refutes blog.computationalcomplexity.org: The fact that ETH and SETH fail doesn't mean their implications are false.
  14. Context ethdiscussion.blog: Our involvement should not be taken as certification of the claim.
  15. Refutes nemock.substack.com: does not improve on brute force unless the puzzle has more than 10^10,000 switches
  16. Context wired.com: it should definitely scare some cryptosystem designers

Open the Receipts Pack → What each source proves, every figure traced, and what would change our verdict.

Checked by the BS Killer desk · ruled 31 Oct 2026 · How we check →

Get tomorrow's check in your inbox.

One AI claim a night, checked against independent sources, receipts attached. Free.

Free email updates. Unsubscribe any time.

This story is a stable, citable object. If you can falsify a verdict, tell us. Corrections are loud here.