I spent years grinding to learn mathematics because it was the language I needed to solve problems that excite me. If the tools I need to do so change, I can change too. Research training is not so rigid that it can only applied to the single set of skills I developed it in the context of. I can learn this too.

Moreover, truth be told, I don't really see myself doing any less math and requiring less from my skills. At least from the moment I've begun incorporating LLMs into my research workflow to now, the demand I've had from my own skills has only grown. At least in an era prior to Lean formalization.

Because for many people who pursue these fundamental truths, the reward is not necessarily personal fame, fortune, or even personal understanding. Advancing humanity's total knowledge (even if that knowledge is by proxy through AI) is reward enough.

At least from my perspective, these sorts of tools could have the possibility of allowing us to reach post-scarcity (I guess a skynet future is another possible outcome, as is just grimdark industrial hell). If we reach that point, then anybody could (in principle- in reality utopias don't exist) pursue anything they wanted.

This is just an application of the philosophy "automate yourself out of a job every 6 months"- I've been doing that for a long time, and the outcome is generally a more interesting job.

If one only found meaning in life through external factors like work (no matter how "intellectually rewarding") then it seems like a life destined for eventual disappointment.

So, I've seen this mindset a lot lately...

The answer is that we simply need to decouple the "right to exist" from "worth."

You should have the right to exist and explore the world simply because you're human, not because you can use your skills to provide some sort of transactional value to someone else. Deprogramming so many people is going to be hard...

Does it terrify you to look at children?

Not so many years from now, some of them will surpass you. A few years after that all (that survive to that point) will surpass you.

Does that terrify you just as much?

Mathematics is a bridge to what Neoplatonists call the intelligible world. Currently, mathematicians navigate that world on foot. It's exciting to think that soon we might have cars and trains in that world so we don't have to painstakingly walk everywhere.

Many of us don't do what we do for our expertise to be recognized or valued by others, rather that is a pleasant side effect. Many of us do what we do for intrinsic reasons related to the nature of the work, and would likely do it for free, or indeed, would pay for the opportunity. Many STEM-types are in this category, and as such, are compelled to continue to tinker as we fancy, and are glad for more tools to help us expand the breadth of our tinkering capabilities.

A dedicated engineer is always looking to automate themselves out of existence, so that they can move on to the next thing to automate. Ongoing repetitive work is less engineering and more akin to toiling on a line.

What's happening is the verbal/linguistic equivalent of the invention of calculus. No intellectual field will ever be the same again. Who wouldn't find that exciting, and want to experience it?

In a way, young people have an advantage over middle aged people. I've spent countless hours as a middle aged person learning skills that are now useless. Better to be a young person than a skilled artisan during the Industrial Revolution even if there's uncertainty.

> the closer the expertise you spent your whole life building is to being worthless.

Perhaps it is time for life to be considered intrinsically valuable, instead of being "worthy" only based on output or capability. Disability, animal and environmental advocates have been fighting for this for a long time. Not too long ago women and minorities were in the same boat. Even now, there are many advocating and fighting for a return to the dark old days.

> Along with all the rest of what humans find meaningful and fulfilling.

Some humans. Many are content to enjoy simply existing, and the beauty of life and the universe around us. Just like many non-scientists today enjoy and benefit from the work of scientists, tomorrow too many will enjoy learning from, and applying the coming advancements and leaps in many fields.

And those of a scientist or other research-type mindset? No doubt they will contribute meaningfully by studying the frontier, noting what remains unanswered, and then advancing the frontier, just like researchers do today; just because scientists in the past solved many questions doesn't mean that there aren't any questions to answer today.

IMHO, AI means that the frontier expands faster, not that it is obliterated. Even AI cannot overcome the laws and limitations of physics/universe: even Dyson spheres only capture the energy of one star, thus setting a limit on the amount of compute, and thereby a limit on intelligence. And we are a loooong way from a Dyson sphere.

PS: I think you're being unfairly downvoted. Your question is not invalid and deserves responses, not downvotes.