| ▲ | a2ff6eeb0 a day ago |
| Makes sense. The kids can see that education isn't really going to be a sellable skill when AI ends up coming into full force. AI already writes most of the articles I see posted here, is doing math at the level of the best mathematicians, and is writing a ton of the code out there. Given another decade to develop, the kids will be hitting the workforce with very stiff competition. It's not a shock they're putting their energy elsewhere, and I can't say they're wrong. They may be the first generation who grow up fully catered to by AI. |
|
| ▲ | omnicognate a day ago | parent | next [-] |
| > is doing math at the level of the best mathematics Terence Tao a few days ago [1]: > When we point the AIs at really difficult problems where none of the standard techniques apply, they are still very, very bad, I mean they're just randomly guessing. Please don't reply saying they'll be proving the Collatz conjecture next week. It adds nothing. [1] https://youtu.be/svl_1upFpQo (worth watching on the role of LLMs in maths) |
| |
| ▲ | adrianN a day ago | parent | next [-] | | The best mathematicians are also not very good at solving the hardest problems though. By definition. | | |
| ▲ | Timon3 a day ago | parent [-] | | Aren't the best mathematicians the best at solving the hardest problems? I don't see how you can argue this without assuming an arbitrary scale for being "good" at something. | | |
| ▲ | adrianN 16 hours ago | parent [-] | | It can be simultaneously true that a group of not very good at something and that that group is the best at doing something. | | |
| ▲ | Timon3 9 hours ago | parent [-] | | As I said, I don't think so as long as you derive your scale of difficulty from the domain itself. |
|
|
| |
| ▲ | a2ff6eeb0 a day ago | parent | prev [-] | | Let's see you solve some open problems before you dismiss LLM capabilities. They're working at a level far beyond all but the best of the best. And we're only a couple of years in. Their capabilities aren't going to be getting worse over time. These kids will be hitting the workforce after AI has another decade of improvement put into it. | | |
| ▲ | omnicognate a day ago | parent [-] | | I quoted Terence Tao. Are you suggesting he hasn't solved any open problems? | | |
| ▲ | a2ff6eeb0 a day ago | parent [-] | | Sure, if these kids can all perform at Tao's level, they could likely be able to keep up with the AI capabilities from a decade before they would enter the workforce. | | |
| ▲ | omnicognate a day ago | parent [-] | | I was clear on what I was responding to, and quoted it: "is doing math at the level of the best mathematics". This is misinformation and a public perception that will harm maths as it continues to spread. For some actual insight on the relationship between human and LLM maths (including on why thinking of it in terms of "levels" is misguided), see the video I linked. Your broader point is based on a future extrapolation of LLM capabilities that is far from guaranteed to play out, so it sounds like poor risk management to me, even accepting your framing of it purely in terms of value in the workforce (which I don't). |
|
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | dumberquestions a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| The decline started in early to mid 2010's, this has little to do with AI. |
|
| ▲ | getnormality a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| > Makes sense. The kids can see that education isn't really going to be a sellable skill when AI ends up coming into full force. If true, this is a disastrously foolish thing to believe. Education is only going to become more important as supervising increasingly advanced AI agents becomes more difficult. We need people who understand all different domains of human endeavor at the deepest level possible. I mean, what's the alternative? AI does everything for me and I play Fortnite all day? Might as well plug yourself into the Matrix. |
| |
| ▲ | js8 a day ago | parent | next [-] | | It's not clear if it is foolish. The situation will probably be like with airline pilots. The plane is mostly an automated system, but we simply don't let automation to work through exceptional situations, without human review. Therefore, lots of pilot training (and their presence) is still required. But it's also hard to guess what exactly skill should the pilots have. It's clear that lots of things from manual aircraft do not translate well to automated. | | |
| ▲ | themaninthedark a day ago | parent [-] | | Children of the Magenta Line seems very topical, especially wrt AI >In 1997, American Airlines captain Warren VanderBurgh gave a lecture warning about the dangers of autopilot. He titled it "children of the magenta line," after the magenta coloured course line the flight computer draws across a cockpit display. He noticed that pilots were so used to following that line, to managing the automation rather than actually flying the plane, that they lost their own skills to manually fly the plane. This wasn’t a problem until it was a problem. >VanderBurgh’s concern was not about autopilot itself but rather the complete dependency on autopilot at the expense of the internal knowledge of how it works and the loss of the judgment to know when to use it. In 2009, his warning came true in the very worst way possible over the Atlantic. When Air France 447’s sensors iced over, the autopilot handed a perfectly good airliner back to its crew, the pilots, confused and out of practice, stalled it into the sea. -https://carlhendrick.substack.com/p/children-of-the-magenta-... Children Of The Magenta Line
-https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ESJH1NLMLs |
| |
| ▲ | jcfrei a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Just like kids eventually take over most of the daily tasks for their parents (for people in countries where you don't have any kind of retirement fund and assisted living, etc.). Same will happen here - on one hand because the human population keeps growing older without any replacement and on the other because all the new tech will be too complicated for humans to understand. | |
| ▲ | bluecheese452 a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Most people do not have the ability to understand a domain at the deepest possible level. | |
| ▲ | a2ff6eeb0 a day ago | parent | prev [-] | | It seems unlikely that we'll be able to keep up with AI in any capacity. Your alternative seems like the inevitable outcome of AI succeeding, and it doesn't sound so bad. |
|
|
| ▲ | loloquwowndueo a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Dunno man, the articles ai writes are empty cardboard crap, and the code it produces is hot garbage. “Cleaner upper of AI messes” might be a good future skill to have. |
| |
| ▲ | lordnacho a day ago | parent | next [-] | | I don't think you can dismiss the output quality so easily. Give yourself a few hours to write out some code in the old way. Can you really tell me that you could not have done a better job with AI in the same time? Eg, implement chess or poker games. Or write a component like a Swiss table. It's not obvious to me that AI produces bad work at all. | | |
| ▲ | loloquwowndueo a day ago | parent [-] | | That’s the thing - many times it’s not obvious. But go check that chunk of code that, sure, works, and you’ll find subtleties that just don’t look right. But hey - you do you if that’s the kind of quality you’re happy with. | | |
| ▲ | lordnacho a day ago | parent [-] | | And traditionally written code won't have those subtleties? Really? | | |
| ▲ | loloquwowndueo a day ago | parent [-] | | Not unless it’s written by a total novice. But hey - as in my previous reply, if you’re happy with AI-written code and honestly can’t see the difference, that’s ok. Do whatever floats your boat. |
|
|
| |
| ▲ | AdamN a day ago | parent | prev [-] | | As has been said before we've been cleaning up garbage code for generations and that doesn't look even close to changing anytime soon. | | |
| ▲ | jahller a day ago | parent [-] | | 100%, does it matter if I cleanup the mess of another dev or of an AI? I don't think so. | | |
| ▲ | loloquwowndueo a day ago | parent [-] | | Can other devs spew out crap at the same speed at AI? Cleaning up fifteen 10kloc pull requests per day? Yeah didn’t think so. |
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | watwut a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Yes, kids are the demographics known for long term thinking and rational decision making. |
|
| ▲ | suddenlybananas a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Where do you think they are putting their energy? |
|
| ▲ | GPerson a day ago | parent | prev [-] |
| I hope people recognize this account doom posts what amounts to misanthropic propaganda at a very high rate. There’s never any question how the comment is going to be framed.
It’s always, “give up little humans, your robot overlords are here.” |
| |
