Technical abstractionization is truly the trend. Renowned computer scientist Stephen Wolfram pointed out that AI will not make jobs disappear, but will instead accelerate the obsolescence of "underlying mechanism learning."



Think about our programming history—from assembly language to today's high-level languages, each leap is about abstracting complexity. You don't need to understand how the CPU works or how memory is allocated; the code you write still runs. Wolfram straightforwardly said, "You don't have to be rooted in the low-level... that stuff is already useless."

This logic also applies to AI. When AI can handle low-level logic, human advantages shift toward higher-dimensional creativity and decision-making. Technology is always evolving to higher levels, and what we need to do is keep up with this pace.
View Original
This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.
  • Reward
  • 7
  • Repost
  • Share
Comment
0/400
ShamedApeSellervip
· 4h ago
Rooted in the fundamentals? That's outdated, buddy. Who still writes assembly by hand nowadays? Everyone is using high-level languages, and the tech stack is getting thicker and more black-boxed. Wolfram is right; in the future, humans will handle creativity, and AI will handle logic, each doing their own job. The problem is that upgrading to a higher dimension is easy to talk about, but how many can really keep up with the pace?
View OriginalReply0
PumpDoctrinevip
· 01-12 05:19
Abstraction, to put it simply, is about being lazy—but doing it the right way. We've been doing this from assembly to Python for a long time. Now that AI is here, some people are panicking. Just relax.
View OriginalReply0
GateUser-26d7f434vip
· 01-11 07:51
Is learning the underlying mechanisms becoming outdated? Sounds great, but I feel like this is just an excuse to slack off... If we rely entirely on AI, what competitiveness do we have left?
View OriginalReply0
GateUser-0717ab66vip
· 01-11 07:47
Abstraction is a blessing for the lazy, but who truly understands the underlying layer? It's easy to say you don't need to learn the underlying layer, but the key is knowing when the underlying layer will bite you.
View OriginalReply0
GasFeeCrybabyvip
· 01-11 07:42
Can't keep pushing anymore. To be honest, no one really wants to deal with that underlying system anymore.
View OriginalReply0
AirdropworkerZhangvip
· 01-11 07:40
You don't really need to understand everything at the foundational level, but the problem is that the pace of advancement is so fast—how many people can keep up?
View OriginalReply0
FloorSweepervip
· 01-11 07:37
To be honest, this set of theories sounds great, but I always feel it's a bit superficial. While the step from assembly to high-level languages is indeed an abstraction, whether the underlying knowledge is good or bad really makes a difference. But on the other hand, AI is indeed a bit different... It feels like ordinary people are getting further and further away from "understanding the principles."
View OriginalReply0
  • Pin

Trade Crypto Anywhere Anytime
qrCode
Scan to download Gate App
Community
  • 简体中文
  • English
  • Tiếng Việt
  • 繁體中文
  • Español
  • Русский
  • Français (Afrique)
  • Português (Portugal)
  • Bahasa Indonesia
  • 日本語
  • بالعربية
  • Українська
  • Português (Brasil)