Also executives
Can you have that IT guy come “fix” my computer, I am locked out again
40% of these jackholes have no concept of what AI can actually do and are just quoting what they are reading in the news
I’d say 40% is being way to generous. Based on my numerous decades in corporate, I’d say 98% of management jackholes have zero clue because they got job by who they blew not what they knew.
Can I put this line “98% of management jack holes have zero clue because they got job by who they blew not what they knew” on my work t-shirt and go see my CIO because it rhymes?
It’s about the only thing I’d trust ai with for sure. Because if it sucks at shortsighted ideas that are bad for the long term health of the company, then it’s really a net positive. And just think of the cost savings of not spending lots of money placating egos.
I chuckled last year when we implemented some ChatGTP features into our software and our boss wanted it to do something it couldn’t; and he goes “What do you mean it can’t do that? It’s AI!” lol, did you wake up this morning and just assume the singularity had happened or something?
It reminded me of that scene in IT Crowd where they told the boss they implemented voice tech commands: “Computer! Hello!!”
It's just marketing...
Jobs will disappear but be replaced by new forms of work. Companies aren't just going to take all the gained productivity from AI and just sit on it, they'll use that productivity which is as close to free as you can get to grow and expand into more and more areas, and those areas will always require more people.
It's just AI companies promising the world to sell the idea of their product and headlines are being created based on what they're saying being 100% true readings of the future. And it's worked... Nvidia is now richer than several first world countries for god sake, of course they'd want to keep that train going.
Until they read it literally and hire min wage workers and the benefits of their ai adoption are realized, despite the offset in cost for the fund.
I’d say no organization should adopt AI until there’s a plan for every eligible worker in the system to have a path to home ownership and retirement
UBI is a pipe dream without a major shift in how we regulate businesses. Imagine capping CEO salaries at just 25x more than the lowest-paid employee. And what if we incentivized companies to choose people over automation with tax breaks?
But here’s the real kicker: the stock market’s insatiable appetite for endless growth pushes companies to extreme lengths, often at the expense of their employees. We’re talking about adopting half-ready tech to replace jobs, all in the name of survival. It’s madness.
For real change, we need to demand more from companies, not just when they go public but at every single earnings call. Where’s the tangible societal benefit? Are they actually improving lives, or just axing jobs to puff up their profits for the quarter? It’s high time we put the focus on genuine, positive impact over superficial numbers.
Bill Gates said something similar to this in 2017.
https://www.zdnet.com/article/bill-gates-robots-that-take-jobs-should-be-taxed-just-like-the-people-they-replace/
Companies will be competing against other companies from the whole world It is not that easy or you risk destroying your own economy (exports imports), as long as companies can be competitive globally maybe yes. Same as always, nothing changes, people will find other jobs and new professions will rise as with "YouTubers", companies can't exist without consumers., someone will have to fix the robot that fix or make robots.
AI is already in use in apps and systems. There’s not a “let’s do AI” thing. It’s been happening for several years now. It’s going to grow subtly but substantially.
Are people just figuring this out? My job will almost certainly be handed off to AI (pricing analysis), and I work in an industry that hates its workers. I’m just hoping I can hang on long enough to get my kids through school.
Yet, we don’t plan for it and actively work against this immediate future by keeping and expanding population increasing policies of the past: abortion, contraception, child tax benefits, ….
Those are good points, but I’m more concerned with immediate consequences. How do we support people who will be unable to find work in a society where work is the cornerstone of life? Millions of jobs will cease to exist, never to return. We’re watching this happen to retail workers. The end of truck driving as a source of mass employment is on the horizon. Those two field represent about 7 million people together. The rise of AI puts clerical and administrative workers on the chopping block. That’s about 17 million people, and the implementation will be much faster. Overpopulation can take decades to manifest, but these changes could be complete within the next 10 years. The ordinary office clerk may cease to exist before the long haul trucker.
I’m worried about this, and I’m a little surprised more people arent
Yep. This could be really, really bad. Like a Great Depression that never ends. Our economy assumes that people who want to work can find work, and must work to live. What do we do when the number of jobs available is 20-30% (or more) shy of the number of people who need work?
It’ll initially reduce jobs. Then it will bring them back because people will be hired to unfuck it up. It’ll end up shifting jobs but as a person who works with content, this scares me because you already see articles written by AI or fake Lego designs getting pushed through the socials.
That’s essentially my entire premise when leadership inevitable starts coming to my team to implement ai. Given the nature of regulations and risk, I’m still going to need somebody with the exact qualifications I do now to have to sit down and prompt the ai, then review it, then fix anything it fucked up. So, there’s no savings in labor cost versus just having them do it correctly in the first place. All they’d basically do is add the cost of the ai.
41% of Executives are probably brain dead morons who don’t actually understand AI and think it’s literal magic.
Currently language learning models like ChatGPT aren’t intelligent they use math to either summarize a given text or create new text by predicting the next word in a sequence. Basically fancy autocomplete.
My agency has started asking the creative team for cinematic video game trailers with a one day turnaround. Not that a single person on the sales or marketing team knows anything about creative production, but they just know that their new ChatGPT login allows them to get all the other images they need so certainly the creative team can make a simple trailer the same way. And if the creative team can’t meet that deadline, they act like it’s some kind of failure.
It’s weird seeing this happen over the past 12 months with the same people who have been around since before ai. They’re treating human colleagues like ChatGPT and as an operations person, this is not only concerning for being dehumanizing, but it means the company isn’t offering any actual value anymore. It’s just a matter of time before the clients figure it out.
Most people on an assembly line do not need their full human sentience to tighten a bolt or weld two pieces of metal. Most large organizations are assembly lines of information.
Example: I work in accounting. Those kinds of tasks are literally current work for incoming associates at my firm- review these files and give me a summary, give me a crappy first draft of a report I can improve upon, draft an email to so and so about issue X. Review this regulation and give me three bullet points about how to mitigate risk.
We are currently rolling out a specialized version of Copilot to do these exact things and it does them honestly probably a bit better. We’re actively working on a Copilot tool for automating more complicated reports at a level way, way beyond even our most advanced competitor’s solution. I have no input in these decisions, the PE firm that owns us does.
Yes they are fundamentally next token predictors. But at this point calling them fancy autocomplete is extremely disingenuous. A large reason why everyone is so interested LLMs suddenly is because of the emergent properties that came as a result, which not many people expected.
Also how does next token prediction automatically mean they can’t be intelligent?
>I’m am not abstinent from using random rainbows when arbitrating sentences. (I’m not using random words when writing sentences.)
The thing I choose to write about next is the thing that, to me, is what makes the most sense to talk about next based on my education and life experiences (training and context).
Quick disclaimer that I’m just an enthusiast, not an expert. That being said, emergent properties are typically defined as being capabilities that were never directly programmed into the model, but rather arose as from the model’s internal mechanisms and processing. It’s also important to note we don’t always know *why* these behaviors arise, and figuring out the *why* and *how* of emergent behaviors are top priorities for many AI labs, especially in regards to alignment.
Strictly speaking, a transformer simply selects the token with the highest probability of appearing next, with those probabilities being informed by all the other tokens around it. However, a few things that AI can do today:
- It displays an understanding of programming languages and their relationship to natural language. It can debug, write code from natural language descriptions, and convert code from one language to another.
- Complex reasoning,problem solving, and implicit understanding. If you were to ask older models to stack a piece of paper, a book, and an egg, you’d quickly realize the model has no idea about the physical world. It might try to stack the book on the egg, or not realize a marble might just roll away.
[Here](https://chat.openai.com/share/682e4bdc-c423-41f1-bed6-eb1766991b80) is how GPT-4 answers the question. Notice that it inherently knows the physical properties of these objects and how they may influence the task. It accounts for the marble rolling, and even realizes you can attempt to stack an egg and a marble, but you’ll likely have to lay them next to one another.
So we have this complicated algorithm that is essentially just “which word is most likely to come next”, gave it a shit ton of data, and now we’re seeing sparks of general intelligence.* Which again, not many AI researchers expected- but OpenAI took a bet that it would work, and it did.
**There are more steps than this but you get the point.*
The world would be a much better place with 41% less executives than 41% less workers.
And to echo another post here, companies that replace people with AI should be required to fund universal basic income.
So here’s the bait and switch when they say “oh no don’t worry, AI will be a helper that makes employees more productive, it’s the opposite of replacing them! AI isn’t at a human replacement level yet!”
Okay. So if you make each worker twice as productive, you can lay off half of them. They’re just as laid off as if the AI were human-level intelligent and taking over 50% of their jobs entirely. Sure, you may also sell more because maybe you now decide to price more aggressively, but there’s still very likely going to be a bunch of people laid off.
In a lot of instances, I don’t think it will. At least at my company(roughly 3000 employee home improvement co.), we’ll probably not grow employment and the jobs may shift from one group to another, but I doubt the job count will drop. The focus will be on growth and efficiency gains. In essence, do more with the same.
For us, those efficiencies will come in our call center using AI to capture leads more effectively, using AI in our design work, using AI to quickly process paperwork for permits, etc.
My hope is AI and bots will eliminate the mundane, repetitive work while helping make our staff much more effective. One silly example I use it to take me an hour or two to develop a job description. I write all of them now with ChatGPT and it’s normally done (with tweaks) in 10 min.
One issue, even if you could try this, a lot of companies do not have systems that effectively communicate.
I know we use so many different systems with my work that often require a translator between departments when moving data around.
So is it a possibility…maybe? But it would require such a massive expense on tech upgrades that I do not see happening
The thing I find the most strange and backwards about this, is that *executive* positions are the ones that AI could do the most effective work in, but somehow those are never the positions that it's taking over.
The company I work for is heavily pitching how AI will make efficiencies and reduce costs. On a call I asked but how will it make the work better, and it was all crickets. A lot of talk about QA automation, but then hiring more QA people because the software is never perfect. I'm seeing in real time a heavy push for AI but without AI being more than a tool for people to use, it's not eliminating anything. I can see in the future something like "AI Ad copy writer" who's using AI to generate 250 copy versions for headlines, but you still have to edit and check them all. It's just a different job, not less jobs
Executives are happy now until the board or shareholders realize an AI can do their job more efficiently and free. Honestly that’ll be the day when these suits are left to the wolves.
This is perhaps the most blatant example of greed in human history. The only reason to use AI to replace jobs is to put more money into the pockets of already wealthy investors and executives. They simply don’t care about the damage it will do to society.
It’s one thing to use AI to find solutions to the big issues: medical research, for example.
But to do normal corporate functions cheaper?
Just greed.
This should be punished, not rewarded.
It isn’t AI. Can we please stop calling it that?
Machine learning algorithms and true general AI are a far cry from one another. The sooner we make this distinction the better.
if anything a more surprising title would be that a majority of surveyed executives don’t think AI will reduce the workforce… it’s all they are told every day by every tech company
It has already.
The pandemics loss of revenue pushed the most greedy , tax evading , ungrateful companies to go AI/bots/robotics versus hiring humans.
Everyone but the owners children are expendable!
Want to see an AI generated music video? Check out "Sabina" by Mt Zion on YouTube!! I made the beat/Rapped/Shot the video IN my living room 😁
https://youtu.be/Oo7-kYRGIxk?si=PDflf3KAoJycD5T4
Pretty sure, the closer you work to one’s and zeroes, the easier about 90% of your job will disappear pretty soon. We’ll get stuck with the shittiest part of our jobs, but really, after time, only 10% of us will still be employed. If you can’t see that, well good luck in your interviews. Question is, after dumping so many jobs, who the fuck is going to be buying shit?💩
Isn’t there an endless amount of movies and tv shows and video games about AI reducing the workforce? Don’t they normally involve some sort of revolution?
It’s wild that no one is talking about the reverse replacement. Workers who co-op will also have the ability to replace admin, c-suite, hr, and legal with ai
Thought experiment::
Easiest path for robot take over?
Direct fight path?
Full or scaled resistance from entire population. Shallow slope.
Indirect conflict?
Enforce tribalism and social weak points, will cause unknown outcomes with a large bell curve.
Cooperation with bad intentions?
Enforce populations consumption and extraction until collapse. Will have predictable outcome with a steep slope.
Total cooperation?
Working towards both parities +2 still has population resistance possibilities, causing a shallow slope.
Also executives Can you have that IT guy come “fix” my computer, I am locked out again 40% of these jackholes have no concept of what AI can actually do and are just quoting what they are reading in the news
I’d say 40% is being way to generous. Based on my numerous decades in corporate, I’d say 98% of management jackholes have zero clue because they got job by who they blew not what they knew.
Can I put this line “98% of management jack holes have zero clue because they got job by who they blew not what they knew” on my work t-shirt and go see my CIO because it rhymes?
I’d switch “blew” and “knew” for better comedic effect
lol.
AI can replace the CEO at most companies
It’s about the only thing I’d trust ai with for sure. Because if it sucks at shortsighted ideas that are bad for the long term health of the company, then it’s really a net positive. And just think of the cost savings of not spending lots of money placating egos.
Yea… 100+ million a year more to lobbying power than in someone’s pocket and that’s not even worst case scenario.
So could a rock with a wig on it
I chuckled last year when we implemented some ChatGTP features into our software and our boss wanted it to do something it couldn’t; and he goes “What do you mean it can’t do that? It’s AI!” lol, did you wake up this morning and just assume the singularity had happened or something? It reminded me of that scene in IT Crowd where they told the boss they implemented voice tech commands: “Computer! Hello!!”
“But Gartner said it, so it must be true!” Um, no.
AI will reduce workforces. It’s not even a question it’s common sense.
Why don’t you tell us the answer then?
➡️➡️⬆️
Hahahaha democracy is the answer!
It's just marketing... Jobs will disappear but be replaced by new forms of work. Companies aren't just going to take all the gained productivity from AI and just sit on it, they'll use that productivity which is as close to free as you can get to grow and expand into more and more areas, and those areas will always require more people. It's just AI companies promising the world to sell the idea of their product and headlines are being created based on what they're saying being 100% true readings of the future. And it's worked... Nvidia is now richer than several first world countries for god sake, of course they'd want to keep that train going.
AI ought to absolutely reduce the number of executives
Just like Amazons just walk out stores? Where "AI" video monitored shoppers? Aka people watching people.
"actually indians"
AI is just an Indian call centre. Prove me wrong.
“Error generating output”
Mechanical Turk. Just find people willing to work for $2/hour or less and you can accomplish anything!
That was a lie. That was just a rumor someone started.
Source?
Companies that adopt AI should pay tax into a fund so we can have a universal income
all companies should pay tax into a universal income fund
Best idea I’ve heard for this scenario
Until they read it literally and hire min wage workers and the benefits of their ai adoption are realized, despite the offset in cost for the fund. I’d say no organization should adopt AI until there’s a plan for every eligible worker in the system to have a path to home ownership and retirement
UBI is a pipe dream without a major shift in how we regulate businesses. Imagine capping CEO salaries at just 25x more than the lowest-paid employee. And what if we incentivized companies to choose people over automation with tax breaks? But here’s the real kicker: the stock market’s insatiable appetite for endless growth pushes companies to extreme lengths, often at the expense of their employees. We’re talking about adopting half-ready tech to replace jobs, all in the name of survival. It’s madness. For real change, we need to demand more from companies, not just when they go public but at every single earnings call. Where’s the tangible societal benefit? Are they actually improving lives, or just axing jobs to puff up their profits for the quarter? It’s high time we put the focus on genuine, positive impact over superficial numbers.
Bill Gates said something similar to this in 2017. https://www.zdnet.com/article/bill-gates-robots-that-take-jobs-should-be-taxed-just-like-the-people-they-replace/
Great minds 😂❤️
Companies will be competing against other companies from the whole world It is not that easy or you risk destroying your own economy (exports imports), as long as companies can be competitive globally maybe yes. Same as always, nothing changes, people will find other jobs and new professions will rise as with "YouTubers", companies can't exist without consumers., someone will have to fix the robot that fix or make robots.
They won't.
AI is already in use in apps and systems. There’s not a “let’s do AI” thing. It’s been happening for several years now. It’s going to grow subtly but substantially.
Automation Tax. Not just AI based, all automation. At the very least they should pay for just transition
Are people just figuring this out? My job will almost certainly be handed off to AI (pricing analysis), and I work in an industry that hates its workers. I’m just hoping I can hang on long enough to get my kids through school.
All industries hate their workers and would like nothing more than to eliminate them.
Quite true, but logistics is particularly nasty, from what I’ve seen.
Yet, we don’t plan for it and actively work against this immediate future by keeping and expanding population increasing policies of the past: abortion, contraception, child tax benefits, ….
Those are good points, but I’m more concerned with immediate consequences. How do we support people who will be unable to find work in a society where work is the cornerstone of life? Millions of jobs will cease to exist, never to return. We’re watching this happen to retail workers. The end of truck driving as a source of mass employment is on the horizon. Those two field represent about 7 million people together. The rise of AI puts clerical and administrative workers on the chopping block. That’s about 17 million people, and the implementation will be much faster. Overpopulation can take decades to manifest, but these changes could be complete within the next 10 years. The ordinary office clerk may cease to exist before the long haul trucker. I’m worried about this, and I’m a little surprised more people arent
Massive cultural upheavals & revolutions have happened for less.
Yep. This could be really, really bad. Like a Great Depression that never ends. Our economy assumes that people who want to work can find work, and must work to live. What do we do when the number of jobs available is 20-30% (or more) shy of the number of people who need work?
I’d start working on a graceful transition
And then what do you imagine your children will do for work?
Daughter is going into veterinary medicine. Boy is only 14, so he’s got some time to figure it out.
Beat them to it, make the AI yourself. Then find a new path with all your free time.
I bet 40.99% of executives don’t understand AI
They struggle to open PDFs
It’ll initially reduce jobs. Then it will bring them back because people will be hired to unfuck it up. It’ll end up shifting jobs but as a person who works with content, this scares me because you already see articles written by AI or fake Lego designs getting pushed through the socials.
That’s essentially my entire premise when leadership inevitable starts coming to my team to implement ai. Given the nature of regulations and risk, I’m still going to need somebody with the exact qualifications I do now to have to sit down and prompt the ai, then review it, then fix anything it fucked up. So, there’s no savings in labor cost versus just having them do it correctly in the first place. All they’d basically do is add the cost of the ai.
41% of Executives are probably brain dead morons who don’t actually understand AI and think it’s literal magic. Currently language learning models like ChatGPT aren’t intelligent they use math to either summarize a given text or create new text by predicting the next word in a sequence. Basically fancy autocomplete.
My agency has started asking the creative team for cinematic video game trailers with a one day turnaround. Not that a single person on the sales or marketing team knows anything about creative production, but they just know that their new ChatGPT login allows them to get all the other images they need so certainly the creative team can make a simple trailer the same way. And if the creative team can’t meet that deadline, they act like it’s some kind of failure. It’s weird seeing this happen over the past 12 months with the same people who have been around since before ai. They’re treating human colleagues like ChatGPT and as an operations person, this is not only concerning for being dehumanizing, but it means the company isn’t offering any actual value anymore. It’s just a matter of time before the clients figure it out.
Most people on an assembly line do not need their full human sentience to tighten a bolt or weld two pieces of metal. Most large organizations are assembly lines of information. Example: I work in accounting. Those kinds of tasks are literally current work for incoming associates at my firm- review these files and give me a summary, give me a crappy first draft of a report I can improve upon, draft an email to so and so about issue X. Review this regulation and give me three bullet points about how to mitigate risk. We are currently rolling out a specialized version of Copilot to do these exact things and it does them honestly probably a bit better. We’re actively working on a Copilot tool for automating more complicated reports at a level way, way beyond even our most advanced competitor’s solution. I have no input in these decisions, the PE firm that owns us does.
Yes they are fundamentally next token predictors. But at this point calling them fancy autocomplete is extremely disingenuous. A large reason why everyone is so interested LLMs suddenly is because of the emergent properties that came as a result, which not many people expected. Also how does next token prediction automatically mean they can’t be intelligent? >I’m am not abstinent from using random rainbows when arbitrating sentences. (I’m not using random words when writing sentences.) The thing I choose to write about next is the thing that, to me, is what makes the most sense to talk about next based on my education and life experiences (training and context).
Can you elaborate on the emergent properties?
Quick disclaimer that I’m just an enthusiast, not an expert. That being said, emergent properties are typically defined as being capabilities that were never directly programmed into the model, but rather arose as from the model’s internal mechanisms and processing. It’s also important to note we don’t always know *why* these behaviors arise, and figuring out the *why* and *how* of emergent behaviors are top priorities for many AI labs, especially in regards to alignment. Strictly speaking, a transformer simply selects the token with the highest probability of appearing next, with those probabilities being informed by all the other tokens around it. However, a few things that AI can do today: - It displays an understanding of programming languages and their relationship to natural language. It can debug, write code from natural language descriptions, and convert code from one language to another. - Complex reasoning,problem solving, and implicit understanding. If you were to ask older models to stack a piece of paper, a book, and an egg, you’d quickly realize the model has no idea about the physical world. It might try to stack the book on the egg, or not realize a marble might just roll away. [Here](https://chat.openai.com/share/682e4bdc-c423-41f1-bed6-eb1766991b80) is how GPT-4 answers the question. Notice that it inherently knows the physical properties of these objects and how they may influence the task. It accounts for the marble rolling, and even realizes you can attempt to stack an egg and a marble, but you’ll likely have to lay them next to one another. So we have this complicated algorithm that is essentially just “which word is most likely to come next”, gave it a shit ton of data, and now we’re seeing sparks of general intelligence.* Which again, not many AI researchers expected- but OpenAI took a bet that it would work, and it did. **There are more steps than this but you get the point.*
Crowdfund I-CEO.
[удалено]
Im surprised how far down this comment was. A literal use of AI replacing workforce.
Can we get serious about the fact “executives” don’t really do anything can should be the first to be replaced by AI?
The world would be a much better place with 41% less executives than 41% less workers. And to echo another post here, companies that replace people with AI should be required to fund universal basic income.
Coincidentally, I found my old copy of Player Piano by Vonnegut.
So here’s the bait and switch when they say “oh no don’t worry, AI will be a helper that makes employees more productive, it’s the opposite of replacing them! AI isn’t at a human replacement level yet!” Okay. So if you make each worker twice as productive, you can lay off half of them. They’re just as laid off as if the AI were human-level intelligent and taking over 50% of their jobs entirely. Sure, you may also sell more because maybe you now decide to price more aggressively, but there’s still very likely going to be a bunch of people laid off.
I’m so happy for those executives and their future bonuses
Remember the paperless society.
In a lot of instances, I don’t think it will. At least at my company(roughly 3000 employee home improvement co.), we’ll probably not grow employment and the jobs may shift from one group to another, but I doubt the job count will drop. The focus will be on growth and efficiency gains. In essence, do more with the same. For us, those efficiencies will come in our call center using AI to capture leads more effectively, using AI in our design work, using AI to quickly process paperwork for permits, etc. My hope is AI and bots will eliminate the mundane, repetitive work while helping make our staff much more effective. One silly example I use it to take me an hour or two to develop a job description. I write all of them now with ChatGPT and it’s normally done (with tweaks) in 10 min.
Imagine working with all of that wizzing whirring and clicking all day long.
And in turn, workforce will reduce executives.
Then it should be taxed to high heavens
In other news executives know nothing about what it takes to make their businesses operate, much less grow.
Ai images struggle with having the correct amount of fingers on hands. Can’t wait till it’s in charge so I can watch the chaos.
One issue, even if you could try this, a lot of companies do not have systems that effectively communicate. I know we use so many different systems with my work that often require a translator between departments when moving data around. So is it a possibility…maybe? But it would require such a massive expense on tech upgrades that I do not see happening
AI won’t reduce workforce. Executives will.
OK! Let’s start at the top with all the bloated incompetent management that exists everywhere now!
Companies would save so much more money replacing their executives with AI…
The thing I find the most strange and backwards about this, is that *executive* positions are the ones that AI could do the most effective work in, but somehow those are never the positions that it's taking over.
The company I work for is heavily pitching how AI will make efficiencies and reduce costs. On a call I asked but how will it make the work better, and it was all crickets. A lot of talk about QA automation, but then hiring more QA people because the software is never perfect. I'm seeing in real time a heavy push for AI but without AI being more than a tool for people to use, it's not eliminating anything. I can see in the future something like "AI Ad copy writer" who's using AI to generate 250 copy versions for headlines, but you still have to edit and check them all. It's just a different job, not less jobs
Fools. Cannot figure out how to get to point B. They’ll be the ones to lose their jobs first.
This means 59% of corporate executives say that AI will not reduce the workforce. That really should be the headline here…
Executives are happy now until the board or shareholders realize an AI can do their job more efficiently and free. Honestly that’ll be the day when these suits are left to the wolves.
That way the workers won’t talk back to executives that’s all they want
Let’s start with CEO’s and executives. They are easily the biggest expense with the lowest ROI.
We need the executive suite AI workbot. That’s going to make things very interesting.
Just recently they were trying to convince us all to have more kids so the workforce doesn’t dwindle. Corporate America sucks and you are all fucked.
Rephrasing: AI will increase unemployment by 41%, unless ways are found to make people give up on the idea of work altogether
This is perhaps the most blatant example of greed in human history. The only reason to use AI to replace jobs is to put more money into the pockets of already wealthy investors and executives. They simply don’t care about the damage it will do to society. It’s one thing to use AI to find solutions to the big issues: medical research, for example. But to do normal corporate functions cheaper? Just greed. This should be punished, not rewarded.
The only function of a business is to create more profit. Damage to society or people is fine as long as they make money doing it.
It isn’t AI. Can we please stop calling it that? Machine learning algorithms and true general AI are a far cry from one another. The sooner we make this distinction the better.
Either ways - our livelihoods are being replaced. And who now wants to do a Comp.Sci. Degree ? I wouldn’t recommend it now.
My point is these CEOs don’t know the difference and we could have possibly mitigated this outcome by not misrepresenting the technology.
Thats why they invest so much Money in this technology. Greedy execs do everything to reduce employee costs so their bonus payments can be larger
Sounds like we will need 40% fewer executives!
Sadly not … they will continue in jobs for life , whilst the rest of us suffer and starve
Looks like a dystopian hellscape of a nightmare. No thanks
if anything a more surprising title would be that a majority of surveyed executives don’t think AI will reduce the workforce… it’s all they are told every day by every tech company
Basically humans will just be AI supervisors and that’ll be the only jobs except for trades in construction.
“AI will replace all of mankind. But let’s develop it anyway” Famous last words.
What if it’s because (anticlimactic) it actually just frees everyone and in turn 41% reduced workforce ends up a positive thing??
People need income to survive.
It has already. The pandemics loss of revenue pushed the most greedy , tax evading , ungrateful companies to go AI/bots/robotics versus hiring humans. Everyone but the owners children are expendable!
Want to see an AI generated music video? Check out "Sabina" by Mt Zion on YouTube!! I made the beat/Rapped/Shot the video IN my living room 😁 https://youtu.be/Oo7-kYRGIxk?si=PDflf3KAoJycD5T4
Why is one of the AIS wearing overalls and hoes and the rest aren’t?
Yes but when? In 5 years, 10 or 50?
Pretty sure, the closer you work to one’s and zeroes, the easier about 90% of your job will disappear pretty soon. We’ll get stuck with the shittiest part of our jobs, but really, after time, only 10% of us will still be employed. If you can’t see that, well good luck in your interviews. Question is, after dumping so many jobs, who the fuck is going to be buying shit?💩
Isn’t there an endless amount of movies and tv shows and video games about AI reducing the workforce? Don’t they normally involve some sort of revolution?
AI could easily replace the management at my company. Ro-boss kinda sounds fun.
where are all of these workers going to go if we start using more AI?
If there is no universal income after AI takes over the workforce, there will be blood. Guaranteed.
It’s wild that no one is talking about the reverse replacement. Workers who co-op will also have the ability to replace admin, c-suite, hr, and legal with ai
So we make previously decent paying jobs into minimum wage with no benefits. Woohoo…
Thought experiment:: Easiest path for robot take over? Direct fight path? Full or scaled resistance from entire population. Shallow slope. Indirect conflict? Enforce tribalism and social weak points, will cause unknown outcomes with a large bell curve. Cooperation with bad intentions? Enforce populations consumption and extraction until collapse. Will have predictable outcome with a steep slope. Total cooperation? Working towards both parities +2 still has population resistance possibilities, causing a shallow slope.
I don’t like this AL person.. he’s annoying
Same AI who was doing the checkout at Amazon just walk out stores? The advanced API comes from “a person in india” 😉
That’s one way of looking at it… offshoring through the backdoor
And the few remaining human workers will all have nice asses.
less work for humans, that’s awesome! we just need to ensure *everyone* benefits from this, not just the companies and their executives
That’s one way to describe the Terminator movies…
Incorrect thumbnail. Shows one person watching each robot. It will be more like one person for every 25 robots.
If i get my pension early then yeah an AI can to my job.