It is important that we all remain really calm about the Navier-Stokes situation.
The problem has not yet a complete proof, and the recent publication from OpenAI is still in revision (and will be for many months). Mathematics is all about human understanding. If a proof is not understandable to humans, then it cannot be considered a proof by any mathematician (can you hear a tree fall in a forest if nobody around?).
The work of understanding, expanding mathematics, enriching human knowledge is what academics need to do now with this document. AI is a tool, undeniably, but human knowledge is the objective.
Another chapter of this story concerns the authorship of the alleged result(s). For years, mathematics has largely been a collaborative field, of course clashes between egos have happened here and there as anywhere else, but mathematicians are known by being really open about recent discoveries and for celebrating original contributions (after all, important theorems are named after the mathematicians who proved them). Working together is a must, while racing against another researcher or team of researchers often ends in a bitter way. In particular, Anthropic and OpenAI do not look like they are collaborating in this. For them, this is a race, a way of pleasing stakeholders, increasing percentages, revenues, numbers... they are, fundamentally, companies. It would be good to remember this.