CEO fired developers to make room for AI. Developers create open source AI CEO

Post by chii » Fri, Aug 28, 2026, 6:01 AM UTC

Animats wrote: post #656

chii wrote: post #294

Earlier quoted context omitted.

collective intelligence is not a superhuman intelligence. Markets solves the resource allocation problem, but it doesn't and realistically cannot be called intelligent (even tho it's been called wisdom of the crowds), in the same way that darwinian natural selection cannot be called intelligent design.

> Markets solve the resource allocation problem Not really. If they did, markets would be more stable. Look at the prices of commodities such as copper. Prices swing up and own by as much as 3x, despite both supply and demand not changing much. That's the problem. If supply and demand have a lot of inertia, and thus lag, the feedback loop becomes unstable. This is basic control theory. Hedging with derivatives was su…

Post by Karrot_Kream » Fri, Aug 28, 2026, 6:42 AM UTC

api wrote: post #494

majewsky wrote: post #485

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Understand human nature, incentives, and complex systems like markets and how they produce incentives. We do. "Class war" is just the succinct phrasing for "people who earn money through capital returns have vastly different incentives than people who earn money from their labor, and they also have the means to turn those interests into political leverage".

Except that when you comparison shop, you are helping construct those incentives. When you sell your labor you want it to cost as much as possible. When you buy the results of others labor you want them to be as cheap as possible. The system is circles, cycles, loops, two sided trades. It’s not one group of people unilaterally plotting things. When someone does try to do that they usually fail unless their plot happe…

Post by psd1 » Fri, Aug 28, 2026, 7:00 AM UTC

bwest87 wrote: post #641

Many comments are missing the point or just totally backwards. I have been both an IC eng and a founder / CTO (though me and my cofounder ran it more like co-CEOs). AI's will not be replacing CEOs (or other great execs) because being CEO (especially of a startup) is all about a few things, and all of those things are almost structurally what AI can not do. It's all about... * Setting a strong, non-consensus vision. -…

Post by psd1 » Fri, Aug 28, 2026, 7:12 AM UTC

CraigJPerry wrote: post #320

exe34 wrote: post #309

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I had this hypothesis back in 2014 that all the communications from higher level managers could be replaced by a markov chain, because it was just variations on the same themes ("improve conditions", "make it easier to do....", " ". I never saw LLMs coming.

Yank on that thread harder, developers and engineers are not safe just because they rely on different patterns. But once you've toppled the house of knowledge work, you'll find you can rebuild it easily because the foundation still exists, and it's the thing missing in this analysis; judgement.

Post by impulsivepuppet » Fri, Aug 28, 2026, 7:33 AM UTC

preg_match wrote: post #673

petcat wrote: post #467

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I think its far easier to automate leadership jobs I have the opposite opinion. I've never been a CEO, and have intentionally avoided any sort of manager/C-level opportunities at all the various companies I've worked specifically because they require a lot of effort at personnel management, investor relationships, customer relationships, and generally things requiring having to talk to people . That kind of thing j…

Yes, I agree. I think what people are maybe not considering is that while the aspects of the job can technically be automated, them being performed by a human cannot. As a human, you get special privileges. You can get more information out of people, you can be persuasive, you can be charming, you can compromise. I think nobody would accept their manager being an LLM, and that's the issue. They want a real person the…