Perhaps you drive on different roads, where drivers are polite and attentive. But that's not the roads I've driven. And yes, I've driven in Europe, though not Sweden.
Tesla will have a beta version next week, but will have to roll it back because it causes the car to drive into the nearest tree. Elon Musk will somehow blame both the driver and the tree in one fell tweet.
That was Paul Walker, and it was a Porsche.
No, that's the opposite of what a quant does, as those terms are normally used.
Try to change the subject all you like, but the history of Quant goes back to 1900. Are you going to tell me they were useing PCs in 1900 to do quantitative analysis of stocks?
In practice, it's using a few simple equations to find stocks of interest. Separate is analysis of a particular stock. At a trading house, they do quants regularly, and those are identifying "interesting" stocks based on value vs performance metrics. This is low-movement, slow, long-term process that is used by Warren Buffet and others to get consistent long-term gains. The "quant" you are talking about is looking for short-term patterns and exploiting them. They are used by HFT to exploit short-term and tiny swings. The original definition (from the invention of the practice in 1900) was about the long-term version only. Recently the term was adopted by the short-term speculators to give "short term speculation" a term to make it sound more respectable. It still isn't respectable.
Quants have made billions predicting changes in valuations.
Quants have been making those analysies since before computers existed. Running an analysis on 100% of the trading stock every 10 minutes required a computer.
That stuff you're calling "non-AI" is what AI researchers call "AI".
Like I said, to keep it sexy and keep the money flowing, AI researchers have changed the definition of AI to include "anything hard, done on a computer." Then AI, is everything, including the stuff people actually want.
As an aside, you do know that "quants" don't "predict" anything, right? There's a (or many) formula(e) that determine whether a stock is "undervalued". Finding a currently undervalued stock, based on P/E, market cap and past performance (or whatever is in the formula being used) isn't predictive. That it correlates strongly with future growth doesn't make it predictive. "Apple announced they are adding more RAM to the MBP, I'd better buy stock before it comes out, because it'll be a hot seller" is predictive. "AI" doesn't even attempt that.
In 1950, AI meant "strong AI" and nothing else. After lots of work in the '60s and into the '70s, they determined that they couldn't solve it, so "AI" changed definitions. To where today, "AI" means anything, and anyone who questions the overly-permissive definition isn't met with a clear definition, but insults and accusations.
The universe is an island, surrounded by whatever it is that surrounds universes.