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

Klarna CEO: Company stopped hiring because AI 'can do all of the jobs'

businessinsider.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 218 posts

Re: Klarna CEO: Company stopped hiring because AI 'can do all of the jobs'

#161

Post by dyauspitr »

ToDougie wrote: post #122
suraci wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm confused about why there are so many managers/CEOs who mythologize AI. Some of them use AI as an excuse for layoffs, but many of them do believe that AI (or ChatGPT, specifically) is some kind of magic that can make (1 employee + ChatGPT) equal to 3 employees. I mean, they must have used ChatGPT, right? How does ChatGPT give them the conclusion about this?

I keep seeing great coders losing their jobs and I'm wondering why you would fire someone who has been given superpowers (allegedly). AI is a force multiplier. If you have 1,000 workers, they should now be able to produce at the rate of 10,000. (OK, maybe more like 1,500.) If you have a clear vision from the top, you will be able to hit your goals ten times sooner. Let's say company A is planning on releasing product…

In my experience it’s the good coders that consider AI beneath them and then get steamrolled in productivity by the mid tier devs using AI.

Re: Klarna CEO: Company stopped hiring because AI 'can do all of the jobs'

#162

Post by bni »

LtWorf wrote: post #18
ks2048 wrote: post #9

Looks like it worked - make a controversial statement and now a lot of people have heard of your company.

It's a rather famous scummy company in sweden. Basically digital loan sharks.

In Sweden they are infamous for using dark patterns to make people forget to pay their invoice, and then immediately add a large fee.

Re: Klarna CEO: Company stopped hiring because AI 'can do all of the jobs'

#165

Post by sabbaticaldev »

jstummbillig wrote: post #106
disambiguation wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You find people being upset about losing their jobs to AI so executives can further enrich themselves fascinating?

I find it fascinating, that we assume that employers should care more about employees, than employees care about employers.

> that we assume that employers should care more about employees

you find your fantasies fascinating, great.

Re: Klarna CEO: Company stopped hiring because AI 'can do all of the jobs'

#166

Post by jstummbillig »

zwaps wrote: post #158
jstummbillig wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find it fascinating, that we assume that employers should care more about employees, than employees care about employers.

We do not, and they don’t. Almost every employee starts out believing the spiel about mission, team, and caring for workers (to some degree) and personally invest care in the endeavor. Up until they are fired for the first time seemingly in contradiction to what was promised. Companies and employers do not and have never cared for employees personally. They can not. Eventually, most workers gain a much more pragmatic…

> Companies and employers do not and have never cared for employees personally. They can not.

Being an employer (small medical business, 10ppl), I can tell you that one of two things must be true: Either I am delusional or you are at least in part wrong.

1. I care a lot more about employees than they care about the company, or me (of course not in total, probably). I don't find this surprising, but you seem to think that it is not true.

2. The amount of time I personally spent thinking about personal issues of employees (in addition to their professional issues) far exceeds the time I spend thinking about my own personal issues. That's not by choice, really. It's just that people have stuff and when you do something for 8 hours a day, a lot of your stuff impacts that. Again, not surprising to me, but it is something I care about.

3. I spent way more time thinking about using/abusing my own power and responsibilities, than I am certain any of my employees does about using/abusing theirs. For example, while I have yet to fire anyone, people quitting their job is fairly normal. But neither is to me. Both of these options are stuff I do lose sleep over. You might argue that that's just part of the job, but idk what special sauce people dream "CEOs" are made of. I care about other humans, from what I can tell more than average (I attribute that, again, not to being special but because there is a lot of surface area), and the people I work with are no exemption.

I don't think any of the above is unique to me in any way.

Re: Klarna CEO: Company stopped hiring because AI 'can do all of the jobs'

#167

Post by stuaxo »

sn9 wrote: post #127
misswaterfairy wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hot take: this will eventually be the downfall of AI/burst the AI bubble, when businesses all over finally realise that 'AI-ing' their workforce was a mistake that cost them dearly, and need to re-employ almost the same number of staff to do what they're in business for. One hopes at least, anyway...

Could be a market opportunity as old incumbents blow up after they get rid of all domain experts and have undebuggable unfixable unoptimized messes.

Again similar to what happened with Indian outsourcing .

Re: Klarna CEO: Company stopped hiring because AI 'can do all of the jobs'

#168

Post by ribadeo »

dyauspitr wrote: post #161
ToDougie wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I keep seeing great coders losing their jobs and I'm wondering why you would fire someone who has been given superpowers (allegedly). AI is a force multiplier. If you have 1,000 workers, they should now be able to produce at the rate of 10,000. (OK, maybe more like 1,500.) If you have a clear vision from the top, you will be able to hit your goals ten times sooner. Let's say company A is planning on releasing product…

In my experience it’s the good coders that consider AI beneath them and then get steamrolled in productivity by the mid tier devs using AI.

On what planet does that occur?

Re: Klarna CEO: Company stopped hiring because AI 'can do all of the jobs'

#169

Post by ForHackernews »

jstummbillig wrote: post #93
avidiax wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you're suggesting there is some cognitive dissonance there. I think there's some truth to that, but it's also ignoring a true difference. Personal finances can be viewed (somewhat incorrectly) as not being zero-sum. Me making more for my work or investments seems like it doesn't take from anyone else. While a CEO deciding that AI should handle as much of the labor in a company as possible seems like a decisio…

I don't think I am. You put the facts pretty succinctly. I just evaluate them differently. Having thousands of smart humans optimizing for their personal goals in their individual ways, at the expense of company goals, is an issue that exists in every company, bankrupts companies and super frightening to deal with as a CEO. People are not obviously more noble, when working towards personal goals instead of company go…

Then you might think they'd be scared of handing over the keys to their company to an inscrutable AI working towards OpenAI's goals, but I guess the money is too good.

Re: Klarna CEO: Company stopped hiring because AI 'can do all of the jobs'

#170

Post by lotsofpulp »

avidiax wrote: post #77
jstummbillig wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find it fascinating how the same people can be selfishly interested in their own finances, find bigger numbers (those that a CEO has to care about by mandate) dirty, and square that.

I think you're suggesting there is some cognitive dissonance there. I think there's some truth to that, but it's also ignoring a true difference. Personal finances can be viewed (somewhat incorrectly) as not being zero-sum. Me making more for my work or investments seems like it doesn't take from anyone else. While a CEO deciding that AI should handle as much of the labor in a company as possible seems like a decisio…

> While a CEO deciding that AI should handle as much of the labor in a company as possible seems like a decision that benefits the company and it's shareholders directly at the expense of its workers.

Many businesses are low profit margin with very price sensitive customers. There is reasonable concern that if they don’t follow competitors’ in efforts to reduce pricing, the whole business might fail.

See outsourcing textile manufacturing and other manufacturing to Asia. See grocery stores that source dairy and meet from local producers only rather than national operations with economies of scale. See insurance companies where the only concern is almost always lowest premium, not quality of customer service or claims resolution.

Post reply on HN