Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Deloitte to refund the Australian government after using AI in $440k report

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 240 posts

Re: Deloitte to refund the Australian government after using AI in $440k report

#111

Post by sammorrowdrums »

JCM9 wrote: post #106

CEOs keep taking (mostly misguided) about how GenAI will replace their people. The thing they miss, and this highlights, is that customers will also expect to pay far less for GenAI produced workloads, which likely more than eliminates any cost savings. Congrats clueless CEO… you’re now selling a worse product at lower margins. Success!

Relatedly, I think that success in post-AI business will be about doing more with the same or more people, not the same with less. Like you say, the AI part reduces the value and increases the availability of anything automated, so competing by trying to fire the most people to do keep doing the same job is simply not the game of anyone wanting their business to survive.

You have to provide scale and quality that was out of reach before and is now table stakes (whenever now is for a given industry).

Re: Deloitte to refund the Australian government after using AI in $440k report

#112

Post by JohnKemeny »

emmelaich wrote: post #70

Not unrelated, but the Albanese govt spending way too much on consultants. https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2025/oct/06/deloi... https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/labor-vowed-to-crack...

The Albanese government is the sitting federal government of Australia, led by Prime Minister Anthony Albanese of the Labor Party.

Re: Deloitte to refund the Australian government after using AI in $440k report

#113

Post by moron4hire »

I've been a consultant for most of the last 20 (actually come to think of it, 25) years. Even did a brief stint at Deloitte.

There is a lot of prejudice against consulting. Places like Deloitte, Accenture, are some of the largest companies in the world, so when they fuck up (which they seem previously designed to do, Deloitte was the quest job I've ever had), they fuck up big and very visibly.

But there is a super long tail of consultancies that are basically mom-and-pop businesses offering expertise that other small and medium sized businesses can't afford to keep on staff 100% of the time. It's not just management consulting, there is a lot of consulting for execution in a wide variety of areas. We do our jobs and go away quietly and someone else gets to take the credit. That's pretty much the nature of consulting.

So you never hear about it. You just get the sound bites about McKinsey or whoever charging millions to tell NYC "use garbage cans".

Re: Deloitte to refund the Australian government after using AI in $440k report

#114

Post by tpoacher »

dmd wrote: post #107
thelastgallon wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've learnt this truth recently with most professions. Consultations with attorney based on rave reviews, after signing up, get assigned a random attorney from the firm. One attorney instantly sold my case to another attorney! Just started talking to chiropractor (i know! same as astrology), same trick! I haven't seen this yet in doctors offices. I see a doctor at an office specialized in an area (say gastrointestina…

Chiropractor is NOT the same as astrology. Astrology isn’t noted for causing permanent spinal cord damage and quadriplegia.

unless the stars lead you to a chiropractor

Re: Deloitte to refund the Australian government after using AI in $440k report

#115

Post by abxyz »

rowanG077 wrote: post #47
abxyz wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The trope you’ll often hear in circles like ours is that big 4 consultants exist to provide cover for unpopular decisions. That’s sometimes true. However… Big corporations and governments aren’t startups in which everyone is encouraged to do as they please in service of the mission. Corporations and governments hire people for very specific roles with very specific responsibilities. Stepping outside of your responsib…

I don't understand this comment you say: > The trope you’ll often hear in circles like ours is that big 4 consultants exist to provide cover for unpopular decisions. That’s sometimes true. However… And then in the rest of your comment you outline exactly that "consultants exist to provide cover for unpopular decisions".

The trope is that an unpopular decision is made within the organization and then consultants are brought in to execute that unpopular decision and absorb the fallout as if it were the consultants decision.

The reality is that people within a large bureaucratic organization often need a decision to be made that has impacts which extend beyond their narrowly defined responsibilities. Consultants are brought in to make the decision instead, to put space between the employees and the decision. The decision might be unpopular or popular, that’s besides the point.

If you’re an employee with a role doing x, putting your head above the parapet and volunteering to do y, it’s a huge risk, for little reward. Best case, the big corporate you work for gives you a pat on the back and a gift card. Worst case, you’re the sacrificial lamb at the altar of accountability. Much easier to offload everything onto consultants to dodge any risk of being held accountable for a bad outcome.

So, yes, consultants protect employees, but not in the cynical way the trope suggests.

Re: Deloitte to refund the Australian government after using AI in $440k report

#116

Post by arethuza »

decimalenough wrote: post #64
DrScientist wrote: post #59

While we are on the topic of listing problems with consultants/outsourcing - another potential problem is the A team/ B team switch. During initial engagement you are often talking to somebody who appears to actually know their stuff - you hire them and find that this knowledgable person has moved on to the next big sales, and you've got the B or C team.

From my experience with using a $WITCH for a large support engagement, the A team woos you, the B team is what you get initially, and as soon as they think you've got your eye off the ball, they swap in the Z team. This was for a contract where we made it very clear that quality/skill was paramount and we would happily pay above market rates forever if they could maintain it. Of course they got greedy and lost the de…

Or A subcontracts to B who subcontracts with C and A tries to keep all of this secret until team C end up being involved in a war...

Re: Deloitte to refund the Australian government after using AI in $440k report

#117

Post by anonymars »

DrScientist wrote: post #59

While we are on the topic of listing problems with consultants/outsourcing - another potential problem is the A team/ B team switch. During initial engagement you are often talking to somebody who appears to actually know their stuff - you hire them and find that this knowledgable person has moved on to the next big sales, and you've got the B or C team.

This one aged well

https://dilbert-viewer.herokuapp.com/2000-01-01

Re: Deloitte to refund the Australian government after using AI in $440k report

#118

Post by rowanG077 »

abxyz wrote: post #115
rowanG077 wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand this comment you say: > The trope you’ll often hear in circles like ours is that big 4 consultants exist to provide cover for unpopular decisions. That’s sometimes true. However… And then in the rest of your comment you outline exactly that "consultants exist to provide cover for unpopular decisions".

The trope is that an unpopular decision is made within the organization and then consultants are brought in to execute that unpopular decision and absorb the fallout as if it were the consultants decision. The reality is that people within a large bureaucratic organization often need a decision to be made that has impacts which extend beyond their narrowly defined responsibilities. Consultants are brought in to make…

I disagree that your take can not be considered cynical. Consultants are used as accountability sinks either way which I have always taken to be the main point of why it's considered immoral to use them.

You just gave an explanation why it happens not that it is not immoral to do so.

Re: Deloitte to refund the Australian government after using AI in $440k report

#119

Post by an0malous »

nullc wrote: post #4
dhotson wrote: post #2

Good to know.. if you defraud the Australian government and misuse tax payers money... the consequences are: partial refund.

That's how it went for Craig Wright, famous Satoshi imposter-- prior to his bitcoin infamy he stole millions via fraudulent GST refunds and fraudulent refundable R&D tax credits then got caught attempting tens of millions more. He fled Australia, repaid part of the fraud and has generally been living it up elsewhere in the world with no further consequences from his tax fraud.

If you’re going to commit crimes, be ambitious. Theft, murder, and lying all have lesser punishments the bigger you go with them because you get grouped with the investor class that does these things all the time and has immunity from severe consequences

Re: Deloitte to refund the Australian government after using AI in $440k report

#120

Post by dmd »

tpoacher wrote: post #114
dmd wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Chiropractor is NOT the same as astrology. Astrology isn’t noted for causing permanent spinal cord damage and quadriplegia.

unless the stars lead you to a chiropractor

galaxy spine thinking
Post reply on HN