To be clear, the fact that it is difficult is not a defense of Galactica and its proponents; it is a reason for suspecting that these sorts of language models are fundamentally unsuited to the task.
The AI doesn't know the best move. It just knows a good move.
That doesn't mean transportation is solved.
What are you even talking about?
edit: if we call a cab to get us to the restaurant, and it arrives successfully and takes us to the restaurant, transportation was solved.
Like please explain what definition of solved you are using. It’s not one most people would be familiar with.
As to your discussion of well-defined rules, I fail to see the argument you are trying to make. As a reminder we were talking about the game of Go. Does it not have well-defined rules?
Training a large model to guess when it doesn't know the answer results in fiction. They need to do something else to get nonfiction.
By contrast, for Go the model was trained not to make illegal moves, because checking for that as part of the training is easy and cheap.
Problem is, they didn't do that
Anyway I already told you the answer. The AI will need a series of trainable belief systems to verify whether statements are internally consistent. The strange part about this is that the AI would need to have a way to obtain validation and each prompt would have to derive a new belief system which you must use in the next prompt.
In other words, the model must be able to learn continuously. That is something that these single shot AI models are not capable of.