The emergence of AI systems like Gemini 2.5 Pro raises significant concerns about the implications of technology outperforming human intellect, illustrated by its 84% score on the GPQA benchmark—a test typically reserved for experts in advanced fields such as science. This capability prompts a reevaluation of human dependence on AI and a critical discussion on cognitive ownership. Experts now face a transformative environment where assistance shifts to leadership, urging us to cultivate deeper understanding and meaning-making rather than mere reliance on technology.
Gemini 2.5 Pro scored 84% on the GPQA benchmark, outsmarting human experts in various domains including physics, biology, and chemistry.
We now have publicly available AI that, in measurable ways, is smarter than the smartest people in the room.
The real problem is not whether machines think, but whether men do.
With Gemini 2.5 Pro, the assistant is not just assisting but leading, raising questions about the future of human thought.
Collection
[
|
...
]