• unphazed@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      The Oncology pharma companies would love that! Every time I google symptoms I swear…

  • N3Cr0@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    5 months ago

    I predict a huge demand of workforce in five years, when they finally realized AI doesn’t drive innovation, but recycles old ideas over and over.

    • PerogiBoi@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      I predict execs will never see this despite you being correct. We replaced most of our HR department with enterprise GPT-4 and now almost all HR inquiries where I work is handled through a bot. It daydreams HR policies and sometimes deletes your PTO days.

    • chemical_cutthroat@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      “Workforce” doesn’t produce innovation, either. It does the labor. AI is great at doing the labor. It excels in mindless, repetitive tasks. AI won’t be replacing the innovators, it will be replacing the desk jockeys that do nothing but update spreadsheets or write code. What I predict we’ll see is the floor dropping out of technical schools that teach the things that AI will be replacing. We are looking at the last generation of code monkeys. People joke about how bad AI is at writing code, but give it the same length of time as a graduate program and see where it is. Hell, ChatGPT has only been around since June of 2020 and that was the beta (just 13 years after the first iPhone, and look how far smartphones have come). There won’t be a huge demand for workforce in 5 years, there will be a huge portion of the population that suddenly won’t have a job. It won’t be like the agricultural or industrial revolution where it takes time to make it’s way around the world, or where this is some demand for artisanal goods. No one wants artisanal spreadsheets, and we are too global now to not outsource our work to the lowest bidder with the highest thread count. It will happen nearly overnight, and if the world’s governments aren’t prepared, we’ll see an unemployment crisis like never before. We’re still in “Fuck around.” “Find out” is just around the corner, though.

      • ozmot@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        Even mindless and repetitive tasks require instances of problem solving far beyond what a.i is capable of. In order to replace 41% of the work force you’ll need a.g.i and we don’t know if thats even possible.

        • assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          5 months ago

          Let’s also not forget that execs are horrible at estimating work.

          “Oh this’ll just be a copy paste job right?” No you idiot this is a completely different system and because of xyz we can’t just copy everything we did on a different project.

  • febra@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    Can’t wait for AI to replace all those useless execs and CEOs. It’s not like they even do much anyways, except fondling their stocks. They could probably be automated by a markov chain

  • pjwestin@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    5 months ago

    In my experience, 100% of executives don’t actually know what their workforce does day-to-day, so it doesn’t really surprise me that they think they can lay people off because they started using ChatGPT to write their emails.

    • xenoclast@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      Let’s get rid of corporate profits for shareholders. If your actually want to fix the problem. Make it illegal for shareholders to profit more than employees

    • Punk_face@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      Same. I welcome our AI overlords as long as that means I can just stay at home and fully embrace my autism by not giving a fuck about the workforce while studying all of the thousands of subjects I enjoy learning about.

      • markon@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        I will never care if AI takes mandatory work from me, but I want income replacement lol. Seriously though I hate working so much every job I’ve ever had has made me suicidal at some point. I’m glad there’s a chance at least I won’t have nothing but work and death ahead of me. If that’s all that’s left it’s okay, a little disappointing but it is what it is.

      • Hamartiogonic@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 months ago

        As soon as we’ve managed to make a computer that can simulate an entire brain in real time. Who knows how many decades or even centuries will that take.

        • forrgott@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          5 months ago

          To replace a corporate executive? No, I don’t think so. We already have algorithms more than capable of replacing CEOs. There is nothing that challenging in what they do…

          • bstix@feddit.dk
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            5 months ago

            The challenge is to not do whatever the optimal algorithm says. If they simply did what an algorithm says, it would be very easy for competitors to predict.

            • mindlight@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              5 months ago

              You make it sound like corporations invent a new revolutionary wheel each quarter. They don’t.

              What fantastic new beverage have Coca Cola launched the last couple of years? What astonishing new car technology has GM or Volkswagen released lately?

              Most companies are doing what they’ve always have done and guarding their market share. Now and then some small competitor with something revolutionizing pops up and either starts eating market share it gets aquired by one the bigger ones.

              So between a competition popping up or one of your engineers coming up with a lucky accident, all you do is to manage the business as you always do.

          • IsThisAnAI@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            5 months ago

            It’s amazing how this delusion gets repeated so much in here. Absolute unhinged shit.

        • mindlight@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          5 months ago

          No. Middle management is a lot of repeating tasks that an AI could do. The thing is that were not talking about replacing all middle management, we’re talking about giving 10% of the managers the tools to run 90% of the repetitive, tedious and boring tasks.

  • Lucidlethargy@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 months ago

    People here keep belittling AI. You’re all wrong, at least when considering the long run… We can’t beat it. We need to outlaw it.

    Train it to replace CEO’s.

    • Blackmist@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      “Smash the looms” is the wrong idea.

      “Eat the rich” might have some merit though.

    • markon@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      Y’all are dumbass doomers. Have some fun with AI while your can you some aged peasants. We were always fucked.

    • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      It’s Schrödinger’s AI. It is both useless and will replace everyone. Depending on the agenda the particular person is trying to push.

      We need to outlaw it.
      Train it to replace CEO’s.

      Oh, there it goes again.

      • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        I know it’s getting boring. I am tried of people telling me how chatgpt and friends are toys that just spit back website data and in the same comment telling me how they are basically angry gods ready to end the human race.

        Fucking make up your mind!

    • Buttons@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      Outlawing it is a very dangerous aim, because outlawing it completely will enable other countries to out-compete us, and a outlawing it completely is right next to “outlaw it for normal people, but allow companies to exploit it for profit” on the dart board of possibilities.

      Better path all around is “allow everyone to use AI and establish strong social safety nets and move towards enabling people to work less”.

  • Nougat@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 months ago

    Say execs. You know, the people who view labor as a cost center.

    They say that because that’s what they want to happen, not because it’s a good idea.

    • kromem@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      And only 41%.

      I’ve advised past clients to avoid reducing headcount and instead be looking at how they can scale up productivity.

      It’s honestly pretty bizarre to me that so many people think this is going to result in the same amount of work with less people. Maybe in the short term a number of companies will go that way, but not long after they’ll be out of business.

      Long term, the companies that are going to survive the coming tides of change are going to be the ones that aggressively do more and try to grow and expand what they do as much as possible.

      Effective monopolies are going out the window, and the diminishing returns of large corporations are going to be going head to head with a legion of new entrants with orders of magnitude more efficiency and ambition.

      This is definitely one of those periods in time where the focus on a quarterly return is going to turn out to be a cyanide pill.

      • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        Yup, and there’s a lot you can do to increase productivity:

        • less time wasted in useless meetings - I’ve been able to cut ours
        • more time off - less burnout means more productivity
        • flexible work schedules - life happens, and I’m a lot more willing to put in the extra effort today if I know I can go home early the next day
        • automate the boring parts - there are some fantastic applications of AI, so introduce them as tools, not replacements
        • profit sharing - if the company does well, don’t do layoffs, do bigger bonuses or stock options
        • cut exec pay when times get hard - it may not materially help reduce layoffs, but it certainly helps morale to see your leaders suffering with you

        And so on. Basically, treat your employees with respect and they’ll work hard for you.

      • Nougat@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 months ago

        Short term is all that matters. Business fails? Start another one, and now you have a bunch of people that you made unemployed creating downward pressure on labor prices.

        • kromem@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          5 months ago

          No, you have a lot of people you made unemployed competing with you.

          This is already what’s happening in the video game industry. A ton of people have lost their jobs, and VC money has recently come pouring in trying to flip the displaced talent into the next big success.

          And they’ll probably do it. A number of the larger publishers are really struggling to succeed with titles that are bombing left and right as a result of poor executive oversight on attempted cash grabs to please the short term market.

          Look at Ubisoft’s 5-year stock price.

          Short term is definitely not all that matters, and it’s a rude awakening for those that think it’s the case.

          • db2@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            5 months ago

            Mostly the execs don’t care. They’ve extracted “value” in the form of money and got paid, that’s the extent if their ability to look forward. The faster they make that happen the faster they can do it again, probably somewhere else. They don’t give a single shit what happens after.

            • kromem@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              5 months ago

              It really depends on the exec.

              Like most people, there’s a range.

              Many are certainly unpleasant. But there’s also ones that buck the trend.

              • db2@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                5 months ago

                Yeah, and there are a few good lawyers and a few good cops and (probably) a few good politicians too, but we’re not talking about the few exceptions here.

                • kromem@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  5 months ago

                  Well, we kind of are as the shitty ones tend to fail after time and the good ones continue to succeed, so in a market that’s much more competitive because of a force multiplier on labor unlike anything the world has seen there’s not going to be much room for the crappy execs for very long.

                  Bad execs are like mosquitos. They thrive in stagnant waters, but as soon as things get moving they tend to reduce in number.

                  We’ve been in a fairly stagnant market since around 2008 for most things with no need for adaptation by large companies.

                  The large companies that went out of business recently have pretty much all been from financial mismanagement and not product/market fit like Circuit City or Blockbuster from the last time adaptation was needed with those failing to adapt going out of business.

                  The fatalism on Lemmy is fairly exhausting. The past decade shouldn’t be used as a reference point for predicting the next decade. The factors playing into each couldn’t be more different.

    • DarkGamer@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      Freeing humans from toil is a good idea, just like the industrial revolution was. We just need our system to adapt and change with this new reality, AGI and universal basic income means we could live in something like the society in star trek.

  • bean@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 months ago

    And that means lower prices for consumers. Right? Guys… r… right?

    • kent_eh@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

      And that means lower prices for consumers. Right? Guys… r… right?

      No, but it does mean 41%fewer people can afford to buy these companies products, you cheapass shortsighted corporate fucks.

      • bobburger@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        41% is the number of executives that think AI will reduce their work force, not the number of jobs they expect to replace.

        Your point stands though.

  • chakan2@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 months ago

    What’s really interesting this time around is AI will cut middle management and paper pushers. Those are typically very good middle class jobs.

    Unlike manufacturing, those people really don’t have transferable skills. They can’t go become mechanics or plumbers.

    AI is going to hurt.