When OpenAI disproved Navier-Stokes just last month, it’s hard to see what artificial intelligence cannot do. Only one year ago, OpenAI was still looking to see if their models could fare against high school students in mathematics Olympiads. But if in under a year these models improve so much they are now resolving ninety-year-old math problems, what will people grow to do that artificial intelligence cannot?
For students, this should be the most anxiety-inducing step back. Too many students pay handsomely and stretch themselves thin to be at school to secure employment, even as they watch the job market become increasingly unstable. Surrounded by mostly traditional education, students must begin involving themselves with educational reforms and artificial intelligence regulations to optimize the use of their resources and drawing out what is most core to an education. Instead of passively adapting to the new age, they must proactively consider how to navigate it best.
A number of professionals — engineers, venture capitalists, managers, lefties and libertarians — are already saying that automation will dislodge the majority of current jobs. Dario Amodei, the CEO of Anthropic, thinks AI could wipe away 50% of white-collar jobs and spike the unemployment rate from 4.2% to 10-20% within the next one to five years. On the other hand, researchers show the most savage cuts are not yet underway. But it’s clear that the effects are already felt: executives at top companies are increasingly citing automation for workforce reductions and the job market is looking grim for most fresh graduates. It is not unreasonable to say then that the job market will only get exponentially more competitive.
Another concern is that the sweeping public fear has yet to be properly addressed by the government, potentially relinquishing our chance to drive a sustainable path forward. In particular, beyond calling the possibility of automated jobs a “hoax,” President Donald Trump and his administration have stayed moderately inactive about enforcing any regulations in an interest to compete against China. If the federal government refuses to budge, then the most actionable way forward is to start working with and from where we are already at. For students, their modes and methods of learning in the wake of AI sits at a unique nexus.
Indeed, the school faculty are not to blame: universities, high schools and the multiple facets of our educational system alike have already been huddling themselves together, pondering what is the most core purpose of their existence themselves. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, for example, has already been researching what can be done at the university level to pad the effects of AI development. In August, they released a report delineating what exactly needs to be done. But faculty must not be the only ones in the equation; students have a role to play as well.
There are positives to this, however. Educational institutions were originally built with very clear purposes. The earliest (European-rooted) universities functioned as a way of educating individuals in religion and morals, not so much as to prepare them for the coercion of labor capitalism demands. But where these institutions stand now is less of a system that churns the talent and potential of young, curious minds, and more of a stepping stone to economic stability. In this way, the anxious question about what AI will do to society will necessarily question the increasingly frayed or multifaceted purposes of our education. It is a call to narrow down education to what is most quintessential.
To be sure, the job will not just be about economic security. It will be an existential one. The more students sit back and meander, waiting for the future to hit, the more any type of certainty slips from their hands. So, if you are not here to flex your curiosity and challenge yourself or build a stronger sense of self and community, then why are you here? If you are not here to learn how to mold the future into place or deal with its inevitable uncertainty, then why are you here?
For now, there needs to at least be a bit of structure. So let us begin with what is right in front of us.
Brian Lee is an Opinion Intern for the fall 2026 quarter. He can be reached at briancl4@uci.edu.
Edited by Ruby Goodwin and Riley Schnittger
Interested in becoming an intern or a contributing writer for the Opinion section?
Contact us at opinion@newuniversity.org!
