[ethbr1]

There's a big difference between having something explained to you and developing expertise in it.

I don't see an AI-as-explainer future where expertise isn't sacrificed en masse.

Capitalism rarely supports a currently economically unproductive alternative for future good reasons.

The recent AI tech layoffs are a warning sign that corporate leaders will happily shoot their company's (and the future's) expertise to pad next quarter's financials and trust in 90% correct, but much cheaper, AI.

[Beijinger]

"There's a big difference between having something explained to you and developing expertise in it."

No, there isn't. You get things explained in University. Then you build on top of this knowledge.

[ethbr1]

That's not at all how university works.

You are explained things (least important part) and then you invest substantial amounts of time in practicing and exercising those new skills.

Then, in your junior level jobs, the same cycle repeats.

That exercise component isn't going to happen in university with AI in the loop, because AI will be able to shortcut basic practice.

And it isn't going to happen in junior level work, because AI will be able to do those jobs more economically efficiently.

See previous from HN fp for a more eloquent explanation: https://ergosphere.blog/posts/the-machines-are-fine/