“None of the humans involved in these proofs are available to take questions, give talks ...” If we turn every talk into a defense exam (torturing speaker by questions), we shouldn’t be surprised when nobody volunteers. Invite them. Let them present several results, with short AI-generated summaries of the proof ideas. Let the speaker and audience work through the mathematics together, suggest new problems, and help each other understand. Even before AI, plenty of talks were mostly advertising: grand claims about the results, plenty of muscle-flexing, and barely a slide on how the proofs worked. We shouldn’t romanticize that format. Now we could have talks that give us a view of several breakthroughs: AI generated ideas behind them, the techniques doing the work, and the connections worth exploring. That sounds exciting to me. Of course, someone can spend weeks digesting one proof and give a beautiful lecture. But why make that the price of admission to every seminar? There are many results posted that people once wondered whether they would see in their lifetime. Getting an overview of five of them may be a better use of someone’s time than preparing to defend every technical detail of one single result. “Here is what I understand. Here is what I don’t. Let’s figure it out together.” That should be a welcome opening to a research talk.