this post was submitted on 16 Jan 2024
264 points (94.6% liked)

Technology

59675 readers
3147 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

And last year they were all saying some variation on "don't worry, AI is not going to cost anyone their jobs."

Key take away for anyone is to never trust what an executive is saying. Much like a politician, if their lips are moving they are probably lying.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 102 points 10 months ago (1 children)
  1. CEO wastes a ton of money on generative AI
  2. CEO fires a bunch of people to hit quarterly profit targets

generative AI resulted in job cuts.

[–] [email protected] 24 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Yeah, what's unfortunate about CEO predictions is that they can kind of just will their expected result into being by acting on it whether it's sound or not.

Still, I think it's well past time we started preparing for high surplus labor. We're already in the early stages of post scarcity, and if we don't embrace something like socialism, we're getting more dystopia.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 10 months ago (2 children)

I have absofuckinglutley no faith whatsoever in our society to do the right thing in this respect. We value ownership waytoofuckingmuch when it comes to businesses, were never going to get past the argument of "I put forward the capital for this business, I am entitled to all of the profits. Who cares that there is no work for you? No work no pay."

I forsee a gigantic increase in homelessness and politicians will use that as an excuse to further cut any social spending as they'll pin all our issues on "communist policies." :(

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 82 points 10 months ago (2 children)

More accurate headline: Stupid CEOs who believe hype about tech they don't even remotely understand fire a bunch of workers because they don't think they need them anymore.

These same morons are going to be hiring back most of the people they fired in a year or so after it becomes apparent that none of this is going to work even remotely like they think it will.

[–] [email protected] 28 points 10 months ago (2 children)

For CEOs it's all about the bottom line. Let's say a print magazine lays off a bunch of writers and replaced them with AI. Readership will likely drop due to the quality drop and people not buying the magazine on principle. Let's say it's a 10% revenue drop, but they already cut costs by 35% with all the layoffs. If they come out as more profitable that's a win for them.

I mean Amazon gets shittier by the day but continue to grow their margins and market share. Products don't need to be good to sell, they need to be "good enough".

[–] [email protected] 14 points 10 months ago (1 children)

The thing with Amazon is that its primary selling point isn't the goods on the site, it's convenience. Amazon is relatively cheap, fast, and easy. As long as it continues to be cheap, fast, and easy, people are willing to overlook poor quality to a point. It's the same formula that Walmart used just applied to online shopping.

You need to understand why people buy your products in order to know where you can cut corners. If for instance you're already more expensive than your competition, but your product quality or features are superior, you can't really afford to cut down your quality, unless you're willing to undercut your competition on price as well. Depending on your margins and unit costs you may not be able to even do that.

Assuming a 10% revenue drop is probably optimistic, particularly with how much backlash generative content is receiving right now. There are quite a few companies dealing with PR shitstorms right now because they got caught using generated images or articles. There are a lot of parallels at the moment with the NFT craze and how executives rushed to cash grab on that trend only to immediately backtrack when public opinion flipped practically overnight. The only silver lining for these executives in this case is that there actually are a ton of legitimate uses for this tech, unlike NFTs which have vanishing few worthwhile uses.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 6 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

This is only true if you ignore all the other variables. Which is, let’s say, another company hiring writers and now they’ll grow their market share in comparison with the shitty AI articles company.

Amazon has a lot of competition in Brazil and the more they make their service worse, the better for the competition. But so far Amazon only raised the bar (with fast deliveries), making all other companies improve their own services.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 7 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Companies are going to hype up AI then fire some staff to get a stock bump & Management high-fives themselves with bonuses. Weeks later contract offers will come up for some odd title but will be the equivalent of a VBA programmer role to help improve the terrible AI responses.

The cost will go up and some web service company will come out to hype it up as a service. The companies that laid off won't admit that this was unnecessary. So a consortium of those companies will got to industry events pitching about how this is all Web 4.0 growing pains to give the customer a more "collaborative" delivery mechanism or something buzz-worthy like that.

[–] [email protected] 51 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

So… CEOs will cause job cuts in 2024, and have decided to use generative AI as an excuse.

[–] [email protected] 47 points 10 months ago (3 children)

Reminder: the problem is 100% capitalism, 0% technology. We've built a truly perverse economic system in which eliminating labor hurts people.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Who’s we? In the country I grew up in, you’d get two years of unemployment benefits (90% of your previous salary), free education and free student support of $1000/month while retraining. This country runs with a surplus and one of the lowest levels of foreign debt and, no, it’s not a financial haven/tax shelter.

It’s about how we structure society - let no one tell you otherwise, capitalism or not.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

What country do you live in?

[–] [email protected] 6 points 10 months ago (4 children)

I live in the UK now which is a modern feudal state and more or less a failed state. I grew up in Denmark though, which was the country I was referring to.

[–] weirdo_from_space 4 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I have to say this, if you think UK is a modern feudal and a failed state then ya ain't seen nothin' yet!

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 2 points 10 months ago

No lies detected.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 4 points 10 months ago

It hurst people not rich enough to be in the 1% or above. The 1% or above will benefit from it in the short term. In the long term it is going to hurt them as fewer and fewer people will be able to buy their products and services. At least for this quarter it'll look dynamite.

Capitalism is going to eat itself.

[–] quantum_mechanic 2 points 10 months ago (1 children)

We have Jack Welch to thank for this trend. It wasn't always that way.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Or Henry Ford. Heck choose anyone in the Industrial revolution. Thats when this started truly kicking off.

[–] quantum_mechanic 3 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Well, it was Jack Welch who started the braindead "line goes up" trend of making their share price raise by any means, usually layoffs. Before him, people still had jobs for life and were somwhat looked after by their employers. Behind the bastards podcast did a good episode on him.

[–] [email protected] 38 points 10 months ago (8 children)

Oh man, can't wait for even more services to get extra shitty and customer service to get worse all over the place. It was bad enough with the dumb phone prompts being added all over that increases your time on the phone, when if you could just explain it to a person it'd take a fraction of the time (assuming you don't just get bounced around to multiple other departments).

[–] [email protected] 12 points 10 months ago

Some of the autoststems are dead ends too that hang up on you. When i run into those I've started just telling them I have a billing issue or that I need to purchase some additional product from them. The phone system will push you to a person really fast if they believe you're buying something. Then the sales person can transfer you to the department you want to talk to rather than trying to navigate the maze of dead ends in some systems.

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] [email protected] 24 points 10 months ago (2 children)

Developers: I could use AI to increase my output and productivity while better testing code and coming up with unique ways to speed up runtimes!

CEO: We could do the same output with less people!

[–] [email protected] 7 points 10 months ago

Shareholders: we can have the same profit without a CEO!

[–] [email protected] 6 points 10 months ago (2 children)

Producing more doesn't automatically mean you will sell more. If that was true then why do manufacturers intentionally cut production?

[–] [email protected] 6 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Because software isn't something tangible that must go into the shelves. If you sell 1 or sell a billion copies the difference in costs is negligible. Completely different for physical objects where you need to produce just enough or if you make a nice cartel you can produce less and increase the prices.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 23 points 10 months ago

There will be cuts, we just haven't decided why yet....

[–] [email protected] 22 points 10 months ago

Can we start with the CEOs? Pretty sure shatGPT can do their jobs easily

[–] [email protected] 21 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I wonder how well an AI would be able to do a CEO's job? Why not start with the most expensive employee?

[–] [email protected] 15 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I'm pretty sure I could train an AI to make racist jokes at a board meeting. That's halfway there already.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 10 months ago

Hi hon, can you make an AI to snort coke then fuck me in the stationery cupboard?

[–] [email protected] 19 points 10 months ago

I agree with their outlook.

Can we include CEOs as those positions laid off? They don't do fuck all but save the company money, that can be done by an Excel spreadsheet.

[–] winterayars 15 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I mean we saw this in 2023. Companies fired people and replaced them with AI that was unable to do the job.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 10 months ago

Reminds me of the John Deere strike, where the back-office folks were told they needed to fill in for the machinists and truckers.

People literally do not understand what a LLM does, how it is useful, or why it would be employed. Its like firing your hospital staff and filling every room with an MRI machine, a stethoscope, and a sign that reads "You figure it out".

[–] [email protected] 12 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

The findings, based on interviews with 4,702 company chiefs spread across 105 countries, point to the far-reaching impacts that AI models are expected to have on economies and societies, a topic that will feature prominently at the annual meetings.

Once you start digging into the article it is quite hysterical what executives think a predictive chat model are going to replace. It reads more like a wish list then anything else.

But they expect AI to replace transportation, Tesla and General Motors are not having any success with this.... yet. There appears to be a bandwidth issue that isn't going to be solved until the US upgrades to fiber.

Boston dynamics are having a lot of success with their robots of late. Everyone else is stuck still getting robots to stack boxes. Which is also having it's problems with bandwidth. And apparently logic issues.

They also expect things like Energy and power/utilities to be replaced by AI. And that is just dumb. Automation has already swept through the power sector, and AI is not going to help with much else, unless it is going to start repairing power lines, transformers, or the regular substation.

Above all, this is not taking into account the new jobs this also creates. People will need to repair and troubleshoot equipment at multiple layers.

What is also absent from the article is the executive jobs AI will also replace. Once AI can view things at multiple levels. True, you don't need the average worker anymore. But you don't need someone that is just collecting a paycheck, do you? If AI will be programed to replace redundancies, then it won't only find those at lower levels.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 10 months ago

Looks like consulting jobs are going to be well in demand dealing with this type of bullshit from management everywhere.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 10 months ago (1 children)

The current AI generation tools, are tools and are still unable to replace people, simply because AI's do not know all the requirements, do not have the over-all overview, it still makes mistakes (even if you think the code is good or even working), it's not very creative. AI needs constant instructions as well.. So in general I'm not afraid at all of these current AIs. It's just a tool... like an editor or stackoverflow for support Q&A.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 10 months ago (1 children)

All of those limitations you describe on AI also apply to a lot of humans.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

As if AI is trying to replicate the humans behavior. Then again, I still see GenAI as a tool and not as a replacement for humans. Until at some singularity point in time maybe..

I do believe some jobs might disappear, which are jobs nobody really wanted anyway (sorry). But at the same time, new jobs will arise with new technology just like with the the computer, internet, smartphones, etc..

[–] [email protected] 8 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I'm actually okay with this if it results in fewer duties with the same number of jobs.

There's an awful lot of stuff in my job that is just tedious busy work. No human ever reads the reports I write, so they might as well not even be written by human either.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 10 months ago

You'll get more work, lower pay and you'll be fucking grateful!

[–] [email protected] 7 points 10 months ago

I wish that bar chart was broken down by job type, not industry. I’d wager that a lot of these jobs are the same jobs across all of those industries. Example: customer service, copy writing, etc.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I am here with my popcorn to see how well this will play for those CEOs.

We are in an age in which getting to a power position is a reality show. You don’t need to know how to do anything, really. It’s enough that you have charisma and trigger emotions (possibly negative emotions, they work better)

[–] [email protected] 3 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

In theory because of AI in the future the only people will be worth a damn will be people with actually original ideas. They'll tell the AI what to do and then the AI will run the business.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 10 months ago

This is the best summary I could come up with:


A quarter of global chief executives expect the deployment of generative artificial intelligence to lead to headcount reductions of at least 5 percent this year, according to a survey unveiled as world and business leaders gathered in Davos, Switzerland.

Industries led by media and entertainment, banking, insurance, and logistics were most likely to predict job losses because of cutting-edge AI tools, according to the poll of top directors conducted by PwC ahead of this week’s World Economic Forum.

The findings, based on interviews with 4,702 company chiefs spread across 105 countries, point to the far-reaching impacts that AI models are expected to have on economies and societies, a topic that will feature prominently at the annual meetings.

The PwC survey showed that a rising share of executives envisage strengthening economic growth in 2024, but at the same time are exercised by the need to respond to revolutionary developments including generative AI and climate change.

In the shorter term, the study pointed to receding anxiety about the broader outlook, with less than a quarter of directors reporting that their firm is “highly/extremely” exposed to the threat of inflation, a steep drop from last year’s 40 percent reading.

The findings reflect hopes that the worst of the inflationary upsurge that hit economies from 2021 onwards has now passed, and comes amid investor speculation that central banks led by the US Federal Reserve will start cutting policy rates as soon as this spring.


The original article contains 683 words, the summary contains 240 words. Saved 65%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!

load more comments
view more: next ›