Live data from Hacker News

AI sticker shock hits corporate America

axios.com

121–130 of 154 posts

Re: AI sticker shock hits corporate America

#121
post #13

Playing out in company after company right now: CEOs: “Get me some of that GenAI” CTO: “OK, we have all the GenAI” CEOs: “Employees, it’s AI or bust” Employees: Tokenmax CFO: “Um, this is costing a ton and we’re not seeing savings or efficiency materialize.” CEO: “Are we getting any value out of this?” COO: “Not really, and frankly I’m getting annoyed at all the AI slop turning up all over.” CEO: “OK, well, let’s do…

These are golden times for AI consulting. We're getting into that business because it is up for grabs. Everybody as AI FOMO right now and begging people to take their money. Exactly what you are highlighting. And, yet, nobody has the beginning of a clue what to do or how to do stuff with AI. That's classic consulting territory.

My analysis of the whole space is that all the tech people are focused on completely the wrong end of the problem space (model quality, training, token cost, etc.). They are geeking out on that stuff. Worse, they are mostly not even that good at using their own tools. I regularly talk to so called "AI native" companies that are hiring enterprise sales people to do sales like it's 2006 instead of 2026. Their product is AI native, but their companies aren't.

The real issues are on the low level plumbing end. How do you connect all the data silos you have. Are they even the right silos still? And once you fix that: how do you get organized around tapping into those. What guardrails do you need? How do you deal with compliance issues? Etc. You don't need to do a lot to get value back. Most people haven't gone there yet.

Mostly people actually already have and pay for the tools that would enable a lot more if only they knew how: ChatGPT, Codex, Manus, Perlexity Computer, Claude CoWork, etc.

What you are outlining is funny but true. The issue isn't money or tools but figuring out what to do with the tools you already bought.

Re: AI sticker shock hits corporate America

#122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is it too late to scratch your final sentence?

FWIW I don't think it's tinfoil hat at all but when you say things like that on here you get a lot of late-stage-McCarthyists screaming about you being a Communist.

Hmm. That hasn't been my experience of HN, but if so, all the more reason to say what you really think. /$.02

Re: AI sticker shock hits corporate America

#123

Well, if AI has a massive sticker shock attributed, so we should target the high value roles and should save money, right? So im looking at CEO, CTO, CFO, and all the chief-something-officer. If LLMs are that totally amazing at thinking, then we should be targeting upper management, not the workers. That would save a LOT of money for the shareholders! /snark We all know why they wont.

So it goes. Wage theft dwarfs the amount lost to street-level theft, robbery, burglary, etc., combined. The economic stimulus from correcting even a portion of annual wage theft would represent complete coverage of those violent thefts - economically-speaking, there would be no reason for criminals to carry them out. Why rob a gas station to get your drug money? Everyone around you is making enough extra at work that…

Exactly. And even worse is that crime itself is firmly rooted in politics.

Example: You work at walmart, as a cashier. You drop a $100 bill on the floor and pocket it from the till. You're caught, cops called, and you are arrested.

Example: You work as a manager at the same walmart. Store manager says labor costs are too damned high. So you go in on 10 employees, and edit their timecards to cut $100 from each of them, totaling $1000. IF you are caught, police will not respond. Instead, it is a "civil matter".

This is a bit dated chart, but its still very much correct. https://www.tcworkerscenter.org/2018/09/wage-theft-vs-other-... But notice the wage theft types are all "civil matters", and the non-eage theft are heavily criminally prosecuted. And who does those? Predominantly poorer people.

We also see this with dumping trash, being criminal and severe to the individual, but companies (read: Musk) can dump thousands of gallons of toxic sludge per day. https://www.yahoo.com/news/articles/inspection-texas-drainag...

We also see criminality differences between charges of freebase cocaine versus crack cocaine. Crack was what black people smoked, so sentencing was like 10x of freebase.

When you start looking at how laws are apllied, its almost always the same pattern: those at the top are a civil matter. Those who report to the top are a criminal matter. Those at the bottom are "charged with the fullest maximum punishment".

Re: AI sticker shock hits corporate America

#124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let's not forget about the environmental impacts. It's crazy that people are willfully burning so much energy for almost no return. And we thought bitcoin was bad... This is just completely irresponsible, if not sociopathic behavior.

Bitcoin doesn't have long conversations with you, including deeply technical ones, in a way that you thought only a human being could just 5 years ago. They are not the same. I agree fully with you on the potential for energy waste. We always do that, though, with nearly everything. How many of today's jet plane flights really needed to happen? The question is how much value people feel they're getting. People are ha…

I was specifically talking about needless token maxxing, though.

> How many of today's jet plane flights really needed to happen?

Many jet plane flights are indeed not necessary and there are people who deliberately avoid such unnecessary flights.

> The question is how much value people feel they're getting.

It is indeed a question we should keep asking and weight the answers against the energy footprint.

Re: AI sticker shock hits corporate America

#125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The more tokens you burn, the more demand for hardware there will be. More demand for hardware means higher stock prices -> more money in your employer's pocket. If you work for NVIDIA, sure, but otherwise, this makes no sense to me.

I'm guessing you aren't invested in any of these stocks. I'm also guessing, to take the perspective of a tokenamxxing GenZ employee, that their bosses are.

Right, because every $100 spent on tokens results in more than $100 of profit from NVIDIA stock. That totally makes sense. But why so indirect, why not buy NVIDIA GPU and trash them? That should increase profit even more, since you're cutting out the middlemen.

All that aside, refusal to participate in bullshit doesn't imply some "plan" to bring the company down, it's really just refusing bullshit. It's not "5D bullshit", i.e. a move in the same bullshit game they are refusing

And if you offer someone 5 bucks to help burn down their own house, that of all their friends, so someone can make 5000 bucks, then they might just refuse, not because they have some plan, but precisely because refusal or letting themselves get hollowed out as well is the only option they're given. It's not like any of the hollowed out people listen to them in earnest.

Young people, which is crazy to me, often want some kind of stake and participation in the world rather than being disposable slaves, they want to do work that makes sense, that enables them and others to grow and prosper, in order to prepare them to become stewards of that world later on, which they want to make better and not just exploit, generally. Mostly, some of them of course are assholes or stupid, but in general, people come to this world way less fucked up than the world wants them to be.

Re: AI sticker shock hits corporate America

#126
post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ah, that's not how it works : CEOs are rich so they are successful. They are successful so they are rich. Q.E.D.

> CEOs are rich so they are successful. "Successful" in which sense? The most reasonable definition "Successful in convincing other people to give them money" is rather a tautology. :-) A very related problem concerning your argument is well-known for decades: the Principal–agent problem: > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principal%E2%80%93agent_proble... It says that the self-interest of an agent (e.g. the CEO) is not…

As you might see in other comments the tautology is the joke.

Re: AI sticker shock hits corporate America

#127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So it goes. Wage theft dwarfs the amount lost to street-level theft, robbery, burglary, etc., combined. The economic stimulus from correcting even a portion of annual wage theft would represent complete coverage of those violent thefts - economically-speaking, there would be no reason for criminals to carry them out. Why rob a gas station to get your drug money? Everyone around you is making enough extra at work that…

Exactly. And even worse is that crime itself is firmly rooted in politics. Example: You work at walmart, as a cashier. You drop a $100 bill on the floor and pocket it from the till. You're caught, cops called, and you are arrested. Example: You work as a manager at the same walmart. Store manager says labor costs are too damned high. So you go in on 10 employees, and edit their timecards to cut $100 from each of them…

Right. Though I want to focus on a specific aspect of your hypothetical (which is essentially real):

If the manager hadn't stolen $100 from the cashier, there would have been a MUCH weaker incentive for the cashier to steal themselves.

This is the crux around which everything else turns: we are effectively post-scarcity, as far as production is concerned. As a society, we purposely create theft, and debt, and the associated desperation and crime, as a matter of policy. As a choice.

If you were eradicate wage theft, you would essentially eradicate the internal logic of street theft, in the vast majority of cases. We could just... not have theft. But by not prosecuting wage theft, we, as a society, have decided that we condone and even need theft.

Re: AI sticker shock hits corporate America

#128
post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If it was so clearly ineffective, why does it get challenged more often and replaced? Existing corporations aren't likely to change, but new startups and work owned coops exist, so why don't they compete? Maybe ranking it on a scale of best to worse is too simplistic a view, and there are reasons this develops. Maybe it is the best option when there is a good leader, thus such structures dominate, much as a governmen…

>If it was so clearly ineffective, why does it get challenged more often and replaced? I supposed you meant "why doesn't it get challenged"? Well, look at how long it took for a democratic/Republican system to appear and survive. The French 1st Republic was immediately at war with all of Europe (I am not talking of Napoleon at all here, it was before that, when the French King was executed). Nowadays, good luck getti…

Apologies on the typo.

One other question I had but wasn't sure if it would leave my previous post too unfocused is "aren't we a bit too early to determine in our current government systems are really the most effective?" This is something that will be decided by political scientists far removed from the current societies who can see how our current societies evolve.

Re: AI sticker shock hits corporate America

#129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, everything is fine until you don’t want to use AI for something because it sucks at that task and then you end up on a PiP because your token burn is low. Why the f*ck are AI Token Use Leaderboards even a thing. Features that used to take months are now expected in days. Oh you didn’t merge 40 pull requests and deploy to prod 15 times today? Aren’t you using Opus the greatest thing since the invention of the wh…

> on a PiP because your token burn is low Does this happen? I’ve never been at a company that measures employee performance by token burn targets. I suspect most companies don’t do that, but I could be wrong obviously.

I know people that were laid off because they were low on the “token leaderboard” so yes it happens.

Re: AI sticker shock hits corporate America

#130
post #82

The AI fever pitch has done a great job at exposing which companies were run with a degree of sanity, versus who bought blindly into the hype train narrative of worker replacement and went all-in. Look, LLMs thrive when they’re given structured data that’s well annotated, clear direction, and treated as the probabilistic machines they are. Not one of those meshes with the AI narrative of “works on existing stuff, req…

Maybe management is a more reasonable target for human equivalence ;)

I mean most managers in my incredibly subjective experience are indistinguishable from the probability slot machines that are LLMs, and those who weren’t were often managers I’d walk through fire for.

I’d love to see more research on the efficacy of LLMs as organizational middle management, but I fret that without sufficient anonymity protections for staff they’ll just do the same biased shit humans do.

Post reply on HN