I mean, in this context I agree. But most people doing math in high school or university are graded on their working of a problem, with the final result usually equating to a small proportion of the total marks received.
Most people learn to avoid that person that is wrong/has bad judgment and is arrogant about it.
Not only do LLMs not know some things, they don't know that they don't know because of a lack of true reasoning ability, so they inevitably end up like Peter Zeihan, confidently spouting nonsense
That heavily depends on the individual grader/instructor. A good grader will take into account the amount of progress toward the solution. Restating trivial facts of the problem (in slightly different ways) or pursuing an invalid solution to a dead end should not be awarded any marks.
impressive attempt though, it used number of wraps which I found quite clever