111–120 of 186 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've personally managed to produce roughly 8x the production outages and show-stopper bugs than I did before LLMs, so thing are looking pretty good!
So 4x more productive from WFH and 8x more from LLMs. The standard is now 32x more productive than 5 years ago.
Weird
But then it gives details:
> By contrast, the healthcare and nursing sector – previously a consistent driver of job growth – saw vacancies fall by 10.21% in May. Other sectors with notable drops included admin (-9.22%), maintenance (-7.95%), and domestic help and cleaning (-5.72%).
Am I missing something here ? Apart from the "admin" part, I fail to see how the reduction in "healthcare, nursing, maintenance, domestic help and cleaning" can be attributed to ChatGPT, or LLMs in general.
Or am I misunderstanding the claim ?
I can completely imagine why people would fire their house cleaner, care for they elderly themselves, postpone repairing that fridge, etc... But it would purely be because: "we can't afford it". So, revenue inequality, energy shortage, world insecurity, etc... could play a part. LLMs ? I don't see how.
(Or would it be a ripple effect of growing inequality ? The AI boost is increasing inequality, and now, tech bros are the only one who can afford going to the restaurant or hiring a cleaner - but they only eat 3 times a day, and only have x rooms to clean ?)
Quite frankly: "in the last 2 years since ChatGPT came out, we had dozen of trade wars and three real ones, no one wants to invest any more" looks like a more plausible explanation.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But presumably you could have built it before, just slower, which is the point. For now, that speed-up just looks like a win because it’s novel, but eventually the speed-up will be baked into people’s expectations.
> For now, that speed-up just looks like a win because it’s novel, but eventually the speed-up will be baked into people’s expectations. It will still be a win: the rewards for the new productivity have to go somewhere in the economy. Just like other productivity improvements in the past, it will likely be shared amongst various stakeholders depending on a variety of factors. The workers will get the lion's share.
Unless it goes to me I'm not entirely sure why I should care
I'll keep doing things the old way thanks, unless I personally get some benefit from it
"You are more productive but compensated the same" just shows how many of you are suckers
I think it is possible that the widespread introduction of ChatGPT will cause a brief hiatus on hiring due to the inelasticity of demand. For the sake of argument , imagine that ChatGPT makes your average developer 4x more productive. It will take a while before the expectation becomes that 4x more work is delivered. That 4x more work is scheduled in sprints. That 4x more features are developed. That 4x more projects…
Things should get even out with the 4x salary increases we'll also get thanks to that extra productivity, right?
I was talking to the head of accounting for a small biz the other day, and they were talking about buying an AI accounts payable solution. And how typically they would hire a person for this but now they use the AI. Now this solution might not even use an LLM , it existed pre-chatgpt , but I think the word of mouth of chatgpt and AI is causing business people to seek out automations where they would normally hire.
I think it is possible that the widespread introduction of ChatGPT will cause a brief hiatus on hiring due to the inelasticity of demand. For the sake of argument , imagine that ChatGPT makes your average developer 4x more productive. It will take a while before the expectation becomes that 4x more work is delivered. That 4x more work is scheduled in sprints. That 4x more features are developed. That 4x more projects…
With all the tools around, I think I've maybe become 20% more productive, but 50% less happy in arguing and babysitting the LLMs.
Sounds like AI has landed you on burnout treadmill
It's not AI. We are in a recession caused by fear and instability. Tech may just be dying in general. This could finally be the collapse we have been waiting for. While the US was allowing capitalists to hoard all of the USs excess capital, China was facilitating the development of important industries via central planning. Look at Intel. The owning class has become so greedy and incompetent. They aren't even running…
Look at Nvidia (also US company) instead of Intel, it's what now, a $3T market cap? BTW, that capital was created, not hoarded. Many companies fade from glory or their peak at various times, but capitalism ensures that a dynamic and ever-shifting set of companies is thriving based on demand and efficiency. The train keeps going.
That form of capitalism is dead. There is no free market anymore (if there ever was). We currently have crony capitalism that operates on being able to secure cheap capital through "other" means.
There is no more efficiency in the current markets. Everything is massively over valued. Financial engineering is the name of the game. Major banks gamble with our money and when they collapse they get bailed out. That is not market efficiency.
> The train keeps going.
The only train that keeps going form here on out, is larger companies swallowing smaller companies. And the top siphoning wealth from the bottom.
Real capitalism would have had several market correction in the last 15 years, but the USA just keeps on printing money.
Okay. It also coincides with the end of the post-pandemic hiring boom and the UK bank rate going from 0.1% to 5.25%. It's kind of funny that reliable data analysis has never been part of the AI hype when you consider that AI is used for data analysis.
I run a mature software company that is being driven for profit (we are out of the fantastic future phase and solidly in the “make money” phase). Even with all the pressure to cut costs and increase automation, the most valuable use of LLMs is to make the software developers work more effectively, producing the feature improvements that customers want so that we can ensure customers will renew and upgrade. And to the…
> the most valuable use of LLMs is to make the software developers work more effectively Which means you should need fewer of them, no? > It can be the same people that were doing the low-level jobs; they just now can spend their human-level intelligence doing more interesting and challenging work. Why were you using capable humans on lower level work in the first place? Wouldn't you use cheaper and less skilled work…
I've never worked at a company that didn't have an endless backlog of work that needs to be done. In theory, AI should enable devs to churn through that work slightly faster, but at the same time, AI will also allow PMs/work creators to create even more work to do.
I don't think AI fundamentally changes companies hiring strategies for knowledge workers. If a company wants to cheap out and do the same amount of work with less workers, then they're leaving space for their competitors to come and edge them out