Schools ban AI like ChatGPT fearing it's a tool for cheating, but this is profoundly shortsighted. The quality of an AI's output is entirely dependent on the critical thinking behind the user's input. This makes AI the first truly scalable tool for teaching children how to think critically, a skill far more valuable than memorization.

With industry dominating large-scale compute, academia's function is no longer to train the biggest models. Instead, its value lies in pursuing unconventional, high-risk research in areas like new algorithms, architectures, and theoretical underpinnings that commercial labs, focused on scaling, might overlook.

Historical inventions have atrophied human faculties, creating needs for artificial substitutes (e.g., gyms for physical work). Social media has atrophied socializing, creating a market for "social skills" apps. The next major risk is that AI will atrophe critical thinking, eventually requiring "thinking gyms" to retrain our minds.

With industry dominating large-scale model training, academia’s comparative advantage has shifted. Its focus should be on exploring high-risk, unconventional concepts like new algorithms and hardware-aligned architectures that commercial labs, focused on near-term ROI, cannot prioritize.

With industry dominating large-scale model training, academic labs can no longer compete on compute. Their new strategic advantage lies in pursuing unconventional, high-risk ideas, new algorithms, and theoretical underpinnings that large commercial labs might overlook.

The true danger of LLMs in the workplace isn't just sloppy output, but the erosion of deep thinking. The arduous process of writing forces structured, first-principles reasoning. By making it easy to generate plausible text from bullet points, LLMs allow users to bypass this critical thinking process, leading to shallower insights.

The current trend toward closed, proprietary AI systems is a misguided and ultimately ineffective strategy. Ideas and talent circulate regardless of corporate walls. True, defensible innovation is fostered by openness and the rapid exchange of research, not by secrecy.

ASU's president argues that if an AI can answer an assignment, the assignment has failed. The educator's role must evolve to use AI to 'up the game,' forcing students to ask more sophisticated questions, making the quality of the query—not the synthesized answer—the hallmark of learning.

While AI can accelerate tasks like writing, the real learning happens during the creative process itself. By outsourcing the 'doing' to AI, we risk losing the ability to think critically and synthesize information. Research shows our brains are physically remapping, reducing our ability to think on our feet.