The teen Bill Gates has answers to the AI-pocalypse the 70-year-old Gates has forgotten
A Register columnist reflects on Bill Gates' recent warnings that artificial intelligence could bring mass unemployment, devastating cyberattacks and an unprecedented concentration of wealth and power among tech leaders. The piece argues that while Gates' proposed solutions—international regulation and government investment in new jobs—are sensible, they are politically unworkable at present, leaving individuals to adapt on their own, particularly through education.
The article highlights how AI is already disrupting education: a history professor at Alcorn State University in Mississippi caught 32 of 35 students submitting AI-generated coursework by embedding a hidden instruction in his exam question, which most students unwittingly copied into their answers. The columnist argues this exposes a deeper crisis, especially in IT and computer science, where it is unclear whether traditional coding skills remain worth teaching given the pace of AI-driven change. The piece suggests looking to the mindset of curious, rule-bending teenage technologists—as Gates himself once was—for clues on how to navigate the uncertainty.
- Bill Gates warns AI risks mass unemployment and power concentration
- Professor caught 32 of 35 students using AI to cheat
- Author says teenage tech curiosity may hold AI-era answers
New here? Start with this
Bill Gates helped found Microsoft after becoming interested in computing as a teenager. His career helped make him one of the best-known figures in technology, and he now comments on how new technologies could affect work and society.
Artificial intelligence tools can produce text and code, raising questions about how people learn and which skills they will need. Schools and universities are also working out how to respond when students use these tools for coursework.
The debate matters because AI could change jobs and concentrate influence among the companies that develop it. Governments, educators and individuals are considering how to manage those changes and prepare people for work.
Both sides, in good faith
The strongest fair case each way — we don't pick a winner.
The case for
Gates’ warnings point to risks that markets and individuals may not manage well alone: rapid job losses, powerful cyberattacks and greater concentration of wealth and influence. International rules and public investment in education and new work could help share the costs of change, while the classroom example suggests schools need to rethink how they teach and assess students as AI becomes widespread.
The case against
The pace and effects of AI remain uncertain, so sweeping regulation or large public programmes could prove premature, difficult to coordinate or poorly targeted. People and institutions may be better served by adapting through education, experimentation and practical skills, including the curiosity and flexibility associated with young technologists, rather than assuming traditional pathways or government plans can reliably predict what comes next.