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

US is starting to see heavy job losses in roles exposed to AI

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 303 posts

Re: US is starting to see heavy job losses in roles exposed to AI

#171

Post by iejwjw »

machinekob wrote: post #170
hysan wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’ve had a longstanding belief that big tech purposely over-employed because it denied resources to competitors. This gave them a velocity edge despite being big and bureaucratic. In the new AI world, denying resources doesn’t slow competitors down anymore because AI raises the productivity floor. Now that over-employment brings no competitive advantage, we’re seeing huge cuts.

Dose AI really raise productivity floor that much? Do we have some good example of that?

No because these people were held back by a lack of vision and poor project selection. Not this other stuff that people think.

Vision cannot be bought (thankfully).

A small team led by a real visionary can achieve much more than these bloated tech firms.

Re: US is starting to see heavy job losses in roles exposed to AI

#172

Post by themafia »

ACCount37 wrote: post #83
themafia wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you replace customer service with LLMs I will look for a way to stop doing business with you.

Why care if "unthinking execution of a generic customer service script" is performed by an interpreter made of silicon or flesh? Neither has any free will to deviate from the script. Both are useless in any case that's not handled by the script. The silicon one has better wait times though.

Why care if I spend my money with you or someone I perceive to provide better service?

I mean, it's my money, you need to justify your reasons for deserving it.

Re: US is starting to see heavy job losses in roles exposed to AI

#173

Post by themafia »

thayne wrote: post #149
themafia wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you replace customer service with LLMs I will look for a way to stop doing business with you.

The number of businesses you can switch to is quickly diminishing.

True; however, that will not stop me from trying.

I mean, if you _want_ a customer base that hates you and will leave the very minute something better comes along, I guess you can choose to do that. I just have no idea why you would.

Re: US is starting to see heavy job losses in roles exposed to AI

#174

Post by themafia »

csallen wrote: post #91
themafia wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you replace customer service with LLMs I will look for a way to stop doing business with you.

You will probably be in the minority, and that minority will keep shrinking as AI keeps improving.

Oh no. My decisions are unpopular. This has zero bearing on them.

Re: US is starting to see heavy job losses in roles exposed to AI

#175

Post by izacus »

awfulneutral wrote: post #15

That thing that reassures me is that I kind of think most people in software aren't doing much useful work anyway, so if the whole thing was really driven by hiring the fewest humans possible to get the work done, companies probably could have fired half of us even without AI.

That sounds like a statement from a pig that hopes they've been nice and useful enough to their farmer to avoid being tasty bacon.

Re: US is starting to see heavy job losses in roles exposed to AI

#177

Post by oliwarner »

roxolotl wrote: post #160
Xeoncross wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ah, but it's cheaper. Replace "AI" with "auto parts" or "store food" and you see the same thing. Replace "AI" with "police force" or "contractors" and it's the same thing. Why is everyone and everything getting worse? A sort of "Prisoner's dilemma" I suppose: no one wants to take a stand and lose their business edge just for principles sake.

This is why a political solution is the only way forward. I’m optimistic that people are finally fed up but who knows.

What sort of political solution is there? What intervention could roll this back?

Re: US is starting to see heavy job losses in roles exposed to AI

#178

Post by overfeed »

bobmarleybiceps wrote: post #128
amazingamazing wrote: post #31

The reality no one ever wants to talk about is that big tech doesn't need as many employees that it has. Anyone who has worked in big tech knows it is true.

I think Jensen Huang said this recently, and I've had a similar opinion for a while, but a lot of companies seem uncreative with how they use their employees. like google probably has >10k people working on stuff like "ensure gmail refresh button is the correct size", but why not fund teams to take on new and more risky projects... maybe part of it is that the type of people who work at big tech companies are not int…

I bet Jensens thinks everyone working at Nvidia is crucial, and his reports hit the perfect balance of efficiency, continuity and growth. Classic Fundamental attribution error.

Re: US is starting to see heavy job losses in roles exposed to AI

#179

Post by mechagodzilla »

nradov wrote: post #166
jvanderbot wrote: post #7

> A group of 18 occupations flagged by the Bureau of Labor Statistics as exposed to AI, accounting for about 10 million jobs, saw a 0.2% drop in employment between May 2024 and May 2025, according to annual data published Friday. That compared with an increase in overall employment of 0.8% over the same period. https://www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/2024/article/industry-and-occup... https://www.bls.gov/news.release/ocwage.htm…

Have past BLS predictions proved accurate?

Relatively accurate (I think they're pretty close like 70%+ of the time). Significantly better than just projecting that the next five years will be like the last 5 years.

Re: US is starting to see heavy job losses in roles exposed to AI

#180

Post by krackers »

bombcar wrote: post #64
paulddraper wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

GDP is not suffering — quite the opposite, 2% real annual growth in Q1 — so recession is definitionally inaccurate.

We’ll need new terms if Musk and Altman make infinity GDP and everyone else is unemployable.

How about "permanent underclass"?
Post reply on HN