It's a great analogy.

In short: explore versus exploit. Both are necessary, both are valuable.

I largely agree with the OP, because I can only see an explosion in both camps.

The explore side might be automated by compute, and that breaks the social contract of the existing academic incentive structure.

But people who are inherently curious will continue to be inherently curious. Nothing will stop anyone from exploring their curiosity, and the speed and depth at which they explore will only increase. We will build tools that enhance and automate our pedagogical compression.

And for the people who want to cook to feed the family, that automation is coming too.

Or perhaps we'll find a new ceiling: the frontier failure modes that still require a human mathematician in the loop, because discovering some class of novel insight doesn't scale with current AI architecture.