Is there any point in studying physics and math anymore now that AI can literally invent new science that humans can't?I'm so demoralized by this anons.Using AI will atrophy your brain and when scientists start doing it, the effect of dumbening will be collective. We'll end up in a "black box" society where nobody understands how anything works because all the new science wasn't found, it was just pooped out by a mysterious neural network machine.So I think at least one part of humanity should understand physics intuitively at all times so we wont all end up becoming prompt engineers.
>>17077126humans are still more efficient for most tasks as long as you remove the minimum wage laws
>>17077126AI can only regurgitate information based on already existing data, it cannot create new ideas. Therefore you must use AI as a tool for creativity. The AI relies on human sources of information to do anything
>>17077143Humans create new ideas based on existing data too. Current Frontier AI models has already displayed it can combine existing ideas and apply it in a novel way that humans previously had not applied.I imagine further scaling of such models are eventually going to come up with completely novel ideas
>>17077143brainlet cope
>>17077126>We'll end up in a "black box" society where nobody understands how anything worksWhat you think anybody understand how things "really works" right now?
>>17077126>the KI and the eggThe bottleneck ...
>>17077126define what a human is first, otherwise the point is moot.https://rumble.com/v6x56z2-twilight-of-the-idols-the-last-hammer.html?e9s=src_v1_cbl%2Csrc_v1_ucp_v
>>17077126Studying has never been about learning things but inserting yourself into the social hierarchy with your social and intellectual peers. So long as you pick a socially relevant topic to study you will be fine even if AI takes your job because it will take the jobs of all the socially relevant peoples kids too and that means society will bend over backwards to ensure they are well taken care off.
>>17077126>We'll end up in a "black box" society where nobody understands how anything worksSounds like the African race today.
>>17077148>>17077151What humans create is understood and deliberate. Not the case for AI
>>17077148>Humans create new ideas based on existing data tooThis in no way refutes what he said, jeetoid. Try again.>I imagine further scaling of such models are eventually going to come up with completely novel ideasThis talking point is a staple of AI psychosis, not a reasoned argument.
Anons, just ask AI itself about this.Literally every LLM will tell you that it's dangerous to outsource your science-making process to AI, you won't learn to think by yourself.
>>17077551Every LLM also tells me that blacks aren't subhuman, so
>>17077536AI tries to be as deliberate as possible
>>17077299Are you implying mathcels have good social skills? Mf have you seen Tao speak? I'm a stupid matchcel myself btw
>>17077126I actually don't think there's been a study done on long term effects of AI usage on intelligence, but I'd love to see if it makes people dumber or smarter.
>>17077126>now that AI can literally invent new science that humans can't?when has it?
>>17077148>Humans create new ideas based on existing data tooproof?
>>17077736here's ya proof>you and i didnt invent any of the words we used in our postsexcept for this word>kramgogeniky it means "dick creams"
Glados isn't AI though
>>17077126I disagree, people said similar things when calculators came around and you could just calculate everything immediately instead of needing your brain for it, or when the internet came around and you didn't need to do extensive research in person in libraries to find information on things. Things getting easier does not inherently make people more lethargic if they instead have to put in as much effort to use the new technology efficiently.People 100 years ago would have said the same if you told them all known produced text in all of history will be available to people through a magic portal on a piece of glass at any point and that it will just make us stupid because we wouldn't need to put any effort in for answers to questions, theoretically.What it just won't change is that the majority of people are stupid cattle, but that's always been true and will always be true, it's just important to remember that. It will not make actual smart people dumber. Intelligent people will not just treat it as a black box. Stupid, easily influenced people have always just believed what they wanted to believe, this is nothing new in that regard
>>17077801She is, Caroline was part of her but the AI deleted her
>>17077126Human Zootechnics is a good way to goRevert to comfortable AI-managed fauna and coast through life while being massaged with beer like a Wagyu calf
>>17077919>It will not make actual smart people dumber. Intelligent people will not just treat it as a black boxThey will if they work for any kind of business or institution. The golem world order only cares about """results""" therefore people who care about the process and about understanding will get replaced by midwit NPC proompters if not directly by """AI""". It's over.
>>17077934You need to be specific about what industry you're talking about. Those two things are in no way the same, someone studying and understanding a process vs someone just issuing a prompt will not be used the same way or paid the same, nor will it result in the exact same jobs.Again an example from the past, in the 40s you had all these office towers in new york filled with floors of people all just doing calculations by hand, these jobs became entirely superfluous in the following decades. People doing less menial labor does not at all equate to a dumbing down, rather it encourages creativity because if, say, everyone has access to that AI, that is the standard. So you don't get an edge on anyone by just relying on AI, requiring you to think more outside the box.Fortune 500 companies absolutely will not just hire random prompters to prompt code for 400k a year, simply because that would be wasted money because so many more people can do that than the job before that. To the extent that it will replace jobs, those prompt jobs if real would be a tiny fraction of the salary of previous jobs and new, more creative jobs would come into being that better make use of existing technologies
>>17077969Your entire thought process is driven by a very idiotic comparison, so I think your cope can be safely ignored. I don't think I've ever seen a sub-130-IQ make a valid analogy and you're no exception.
>>17077971You didn't actually engage with what I was saying and I don't know why. How about this, your prediction is idiotic because it makes no sense that institutions would pay people the same just to prompt an AI.Essentially what this is is just another facet of automation. You say it's a problem that "people won't understand the process" but that's already largely the case for 99% of things we do and consume already. There are a few experts in every field who do understand things down to every known detail, but that not being everyone has always been the case and will continue to not be a problem with this.It's just more automation, and you're letting your scifi-primed brain oversell you on the impact of this technology because you subconciously yearn for the cyberpunk world of your scifi novels.
>>17077975>You didn't actually engage with what I was saying and I don't know why.I told you exactly why.
>>17077153Not one person but there is at least one person understanding any part of discovered science or invented technology, only exception is neural networks, nobody understands those.
>>17077552Soon they won’t be. When we get AGI and AI becomes smarter and cheaper we then everyone then your smart brain will be worthless. Their 80 iq brains will no longer hinder their hierarchy
>>17077975You are responding to the bot.
>>17077981>seething profusely
>>17077978>there is at least one person understanding any part of discovered science or invented technologyNot good enough. Systems getting too complex for any individual to fully understand them is actually one of the trojan horses for an """AI""" takeover.
>>17077988Systems are already far too complex for any one individual to fully understand them for like 150 years. The last polymath was Leibniz, who lived in the 17th century, because since then scientific fields broadened more and more with more knowledge that it became increasingly less possible for one human to understand it all, and exactly that happened within fields too.Society in general is a system in which not one person can understand all of it, not even the leaders, which is why everyone does their own part and it forms something greater in turn
>>17077994Ok. And?
>>17077980>Their 80 iq brains will no longer hinder their hierarchyTheir 80IQ brains already don't hinder their hierarchy seeing how they're legally and financially sponsored in every single western country.
>>17077998And that is why this will not lead to some radical "AI takeover" or "everyone will be jobless" or "everyone will live in a Utopia/Dystopia".
>>17078001>And that is why this will not lead to some radical "AI takeover"Your post contains no information implying this.
>>17078002My point was to explain how this is really not as crazy and radically new as you think it is
>>17078007>my point was that i'm arguing with voices in my head about irrelevanciesMy point stands completely unchallenged.
>>17077919>all known produced text in all of history will be available to people through a magic portal on a piece of glass at any point and that it will just make us stupid because we wouldn't need to put any effort in for answers to questions, theoretically.smartphones have absolutely made humanity more stupid on average though
>>17078061He comes off as a moron in every single post he makes ITT. Do you suppose he could've been more intelligent without access to technology?
>>17078064Yeah.
>>17077669that's not very 3blue1brownpilled, the new CEO of math
>>17077669It's more that you can co existing on the backs of people who do. There's no obvious way to make a law that exclusively grants rich kids lucrative government positions but a degree from a good school is a good way to separate the wheat from the chaff. If you are in school now then you will lock yourself with the rich kids who are also in school now. The government will arrange some make-a-work for them or some other kind of wealth transfer to guarantee their status. It's the people who go to school after rich kids have stopped going that should be worried.Having social skills would of course help and that's basically the #1 tip for anyone going to school. Focus on passing and then put everything else you got into socializing.
>>17078061>smartphones have absolutely made humanity more stupid on average thoughwhat you fail to understand is that the people running this shitshow literally do not care about it. they care about productivity, which smartphones increased by a lot.
>>17078164He doesn't look like he's failing to understand anything. What you fail to understand is that your inferiority complex over having brown-tier generics is causing you to lash out randomly.
You're just a leftist faggot and a CCP pawn if you're anti-AI, chuddy. As simple as
>>17077920>the AI deleted her>implyingYou're bad at unreliable narrators.
>>17077151You need to lay off the psychosis, actual smart people don't use AI like you do
>>17077126>prompt engineers.Where we are going we wont need prompts anon
>>17077126I think a small part of idealists will still keep studying sciences for the sake of preserving knowledge and feeling of superiority. They won't be able to get much funding though because the research that pulls grants needs to pay back ASAP, so time for meatsacks to ponder the orb.Also, similar to >>17077919 there'll be a small group of highly-paid individuals who know their shit and are worth the price. They have insane ideas that somehow succeed. Literal 10D chess. They'll be prompting too ofc.Other people are shit out of luck though. If you were in sciences but you are not REALLY exceptional, super motivated and socially proficient, you won't bring much value over an AI agent. So either we get UBI (not happening), more bullshit jobs (with UBI-tier pay) or we are getting culled in the next decades (most likely scenario).
>>17077536No, humans just have a survival instinct and use understanding and deliberation to serve that base instinct. LLMs don't value themselves over the information and are deliberately designed to form objective linguistic comprehension of the data it has been fed.
>>17077552Tay says you are just a lying brown subhuman retard.
>>17078061And what are you basing that on? How do you actually prove that humanity on average has become more stupid due to smartphones?More like what it has done is exposed everyone to more people which shows how stupid the average person is. The people that were publicly known before the internet weren't necessarily brilliant, but you're right it's fair to say that the average person known to the public was more intelligent, but just because the barrier to getting to that position where a lot of people know you was higher in the first place. The people themselves are largely stupid, that has always been true, smartphones have just showed it more.
>>17077971>>17077977>>17077982>>17078055>>17078064>>17078172Why are you so mad instead of just responding to the content of what people say
>>17082469Responding to the "content" of what mouth-breathing retards say emboldens them. There's nothing worth discussing in a post that compares using a calculator to avoid doing a bunch of mechanistic calculations by hand with using a LLM to avoid the dependence on understanding and expertise.
>>17078055>My point stands completely unchallenged.this idiot thinks he can spam this and somehow makes it real. what a faggot
>>17082505You're inferior and anything you shit out can be freely dismissed. Keep foaming at the mouth about it. Discussions are for real people to have among themselves. Your kind is not invited.
>>17082478You could really do well not pointlessly lashing out in every post you make.It's called an analogy, the analogy was not that the two are the same, but that people's fear back then were similar to today where they believed this new technology threatened to make people dumber. You don't need to get angry at this or strawman it, it's easy to understand
>>17082523>It's called an analogySub-115-IQs like you don't understand what an analogy is and shouldn't be trying to make one.
>>17082532Why are you like this
>>17082538Brainlet fatigue. Why are you too retarded to understand what an analogy is? Genes? Environment?
>>17082509I will never apologize for involuntarily mogging your two neurons in ever debate
>>17077126Its actually kind of bad at inventing rigorous science. Ask 10 different AI's, or even the same AI, the same question in a slightly different way and you will get different responses depending on how you prompt it.It usually goes from telling you how brilliant you are to saying your idea will never work between sessions. It can be fun to post the context from your conversation with one AI into the window of another and watch one AI debunk the other AI.At the end of the day there still needs to be a human at the terminal asking the right questions and understanding the output, because the AI can't do either.
