>>11322300>>11322319He's saying that they while they appear to be simple and interesting from a human perspective, because it is computationally difficult to compute one from the last they are not (well he says impossible, but this is objectively wrong so giving the benefit of the doubt I assume he simply means difficult without some form of computing previous terms).
This is obviously wrong, computational complexity is worth study, but there are innumerable contexts in which it does not correlate to the ease of finding results nor how broad the application of those results are.
>>11322246Prime numbers are interesting because they are fundamental to the relationship between an integer's additive and multiplicative properties. This relationship remains to be the source of a disproportionate amount of the difficulty still faced by modern number theory. As a matter of fact many of the problems which do not appear to have anything to do with primes per se are still difficult precisely because of this difficulty in resolving additive and multiplicative properties, e.g. Collatz Conjecture.
