I find it very weird how he didn't foresee the end of math, being so smart. I mean I did and I'm definitely less smart than him.

Same phenomenon as all the godfathers of AI that were apparently oblivious to the plot of the Terminator franchise until after their paychecks had cleared.

The irony is that he’s still very very wrong in my opinion. He’s lamenting the end of math, but it’s not a stretch to think that math is just the beginning. Like the destruction of the buoy before the tsunami actually hits land. His current stance seems to be implicating that the blast radius is only till math or science when it’s just the first domino.

> I find it very weird how he didn't foresee the end of math, being so smart. I mean I did and I'm definitely less smart than him.

IMO this is probably not an accurate assessment of Tao in particular at this time.

But in the general case, I think most people have a set of blinders on that will result in a predictable reassessment of AI with the following steps as AI progresses when applied to whatever it is they do:

1) AI is useless and doesn't impact me at all. Look at how bad it is! (Most developers up until late 2025)

2) Ok, now AI is useful but will not replace me. Sucks for the juniors in the field but I am still needed to guide the AI. AI will never be capable of my judgement (or whatever). (Most developers now)

3) Oh shit, I've been replaced in terms of economically valuable utility by AI. (tbd, but likely sooner than is comfortable)

And not everyone will experience #3, there will be a top 1% or so for most fields where #3 remains true for them, but it is likely that for most people #3 comes eventually.