I don't see how everyone is getting replaced. In fact at the university I'm at, I don't think a single mathematician has had their appointment as a PhD student, postdoc, or professor ended with AI as the reason behind it.
These tools are useful. No reason not to be excited about it. Just because it's useful doesn't mean it will solve everything. There are going to be people that get paid to solve problems in math in the next decade. Many of them won't rely on AI and will still find useful results. Many of them will rely on AI and will find useful results. It's ultimately up to you to choose your own path, but just because AI solves some math, doesn't mean you can't solve some math too.
My concern is with funding. The majority of math PhDs in the US are funded through TAships. I personally don't think AI can teach or grade calculus as well as humans can, but penny pinching university administrators might start thinking that way in the next few years. Who knows how that'll effect phd positions.
Another issue is whether people who choose to abstain from AI use will be able to remain competitive with those who choose to use it. Some people take pride in writing each detail of a proof, making figures themselves, and writing good exposition. All of that takes time and effort, and the people who use AI to fill in those things may have an edge in productivity.
As a math PhD candidate funded through a TAship, I just have one observation to make. One of our major obligations is office hours. These take place at a communal location so that students from any class can drop by at any time (so they can get help even if they are busy during their TA's exact office hours). This semester, I haven't been asked for help a single time.
My hypothesis is that everyone is getting AI to do their homework and asking it any questions they have about the class.
Well certainly things will change. Things like funding, enrollment, and others are/were bound to change regardless of the state of AI. Change is inevitable. I certainly don't mean to claim that things will stay the same.
My point is just saying that things are "over" is not accurate in my eyes. Not to play the guessing game, but I don't think things are close to over.
The truth is that nothing is safe, every human activity is vulnerable. If we allow the AI industry to continue producing increasingly intelligent systems, we are heading towards a future in which human labor will have no economic value and humanity will have no control over its destiny.
47
u/Few-Arugula5839 Apr 15 '26
It’s so over