forget the second

name.

Yeah, it's quite complex, it's hard to understand, it's hard to grasp, so they thought the simplification would make things easier.

Mochizuki had this kind of response where he was saying, like, on the simplified version, I agree that there is an issue, but my theory is not the simplified version, so the objections do not hold.

I still think that my theory is correct.

It proves what I want it to prove.

And that just, it basically stalemated there where we have one side that's like, we do not think that this is knowledge.

relevant for you or am I just saying something trivial and missing the bigger picture?