

Author of P!=NP proof received confirmations from experts on August 8. - amichail
http://www.hpl.hp.com/personal/Vinay_Deolalikar/#s.p.

======
fhars
Confirmation as in "Thank you, I have recieved your paper which looks
interesting and will read it when I find time", not as in "I have read your
paper and fond that all details are correct", obviously.

~~~
amichail
I think what he said is clear enough -- he wouldn't bother mentioning the type
of confirmations you mention.

~~~
fhars
Just like he wouldn't mention the font size of the paper in the original
announcement.

I seriously doubt that any of these confirmations did confirm more the the
receipt of a paper that seems to look legit, nobody can verify 66 pages of
advanced math in 10pt in one or two days.

~~~
amichail
See: <http://scottaaronson.com/blog/?p=456#comment-44799>

~~~
pyre
Posting that comment url over and over in this thread won't make your point
any more or less valid than it already is. Please stop trying to spam your
opinion at people that disagree with you.

That comment contains no content that tells us whether 'confirmations' means
'confirmations that my proof is valid' or 'confirmations that they received my
proof.' That comment is just a response that assumes the first definition, and
does nothing to tell us why the second definition is invalid.

