nostr:npub1psx7zml4neu6v03fe6pqcdp4lvcf444mfswy4rlfz28s8jwtzjtqrxgvsy nostr:npub17jxdp02k4xkynxme9vccg2c2fk89z3nnzzgzg8era7cmc5qyyyjsgzw2x2 it is correct, for very specific definitions of "+", "=", and "1, 2, 3, ...", but their "proof" is all retarded, with not a single step being correct