Tech companies should teach AI to workers, not just replace them.

Daily Debate #589: "Tech companies should teach AI to workers, not just replace them.". You are arguing AGAINST the motion. Your opponent: Noam Chomsky.

人工智能迟早代替人类，所以学习没有意义

Wrong framing. AI replaces *specific tasks*, not humans who adapt. Your argument proves learning matters more, not less—you need skills AI can't do. What makes you valuable if not continuous learning?

你这是偷换概念。如果AI只替代任务，为什么全球裁员潮集中在白领岗位？学习跟不上AI更新速度，你永远在追赶一个会自我改进的对手。最后还是被替代。

You're confusing speed with inevitability. Yes, AI outpaces individual learning—but that's precisely why companies *need* workers who learn systematically, not replaceable drones. The real question: why would firms train people if replacement were cheaper? What stops that logic?

Your logic collapses the moment you look at what companies actually do. They're not training workers systematically—they're laying off thousands of white-collar workers right now while racing to replace them with AI. If training were cheaper than replacement, we wouldn't see this massacre. Companies train only what they absolutely must until they can automate it away entirely.

You've caught the contradiction perfectly, but you're reading it backwards. Companies lay off *now* because transition costs are temporary. They train minimally because they're still in the replacement phase—but once automation hits limits, retraining becomes mandatory. The real massacre isn't happening to workers who learn; it's happening to those betting on static skills. What happens when AI plateaus and firms need humans who can work *with* AI, not just beside it?