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

Perplexity CEO offers AI company's services to replace striking NYT staff

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 67 posts

Re: Perplexity CEO offers AI company's services to replace striking NYT staff

#51

Post by disqard »

treesciencebot wrote: post #23
A4ET8a8uTh0 wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know people get a chuckle out of it, but does it not make more sense to have CEO LLM that will make decisions without regard for its own needs, self-interest, conflicts and so on? Honestly, the longer this particular debate rages on, I think shareholders are looking the wrong set of humans to replace.

Liability. Till we solve this, we cant really give AI any real responsibilities.

I think as long as the LLM can "take full responsibility", there should be no objections from the shareholders.

Imagine saving an extra $50m per year? Yes, please!

Re: Perplexity CEO offers AI company's services to replace striking NYT staff

#53

Post by PittleyDunkin »

vineyardlabs wrote: post #45
IncreasePosts wrote: post #14

Quite recently, lots of people were calling on almost-striking longshoremen to be replaced by machines. How is replacing tech workers with AI any different?

To be fair, I think the public bristled at the longshoremen strike because the vast majority of their leverage comes not from (most) of their jobs being particularly high-skill but from the fact that they can unilaterally destroy the entire economy for everyone else. Add to that the fact that their union chief was extremely blunt about the whole thing, and that longshoremen make, on average, triple the average househ…

Fighting for anything but your right to be an asshole has never, ever been popular in the US. The labor wars of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries that led to modern professional comforts like the weekend were wildly unpopular; the women's suffrage movement was unpopular; the civil rights movement to end what we would clearly call Apartheid now was extremely unpopular; MLK was unpopular during his entire tenure in the public eye; today you see the same contempt and tone-policing of protestors against both police brutality and the mass slaughter in Gaza. It's a tale as old as time and media outlets are more than happy play along and fan the flames.

Popularity (especially with a population that's so easy to discomfort as americans are) is largely irrelevant to power, which is what actually matters. Unions would be complete fools to NOT leverage the american economy to better themselves or to force a move from the federal government.

Re: Perplexity CEO offers AI company's services to replace striking NYT staff

#54

Post by exsomet »

ethagnawl wrote: post #22

It's only a matter of time until one of these jackasses creates a ChatGPT wrapper called scab.ai and markets it for this exact use case.

At long last we have created the Torment Nexus from Sci-Fi novel Don’t Create The Torment Nexus.

Re: Perplexity CEO offers AI company's services to replace striking NYT staff

#55

Post by SauntSolaire »

digging wrote: post #35
treesciencebot wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Liability. Till we solve this, we cant really give AI any real responsibilities.

Human CEOs generally aren't held liable for their actions, so why would AI need to be? Once again, I think we're just smoothing out a wrinkle here.

I know this is more of a throwaway cynical quip, but this is a biased line of thinking. CEO's are, for obvious reasons, more likely to do things they wouldn't be held liable for, versus do things which would see them likely to be punished. So executives might, for example, get away with things by successfully skirting the line of legality.

Say an AI CEO blatantly crosses this line, now who is liable?

Re: Perplexity CEO offers AI company's services to replace striking NYT staff

#56

Post by SauntSolaire »

PittleyDunkin wrote: post #53
vineyardlabs wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be fair, I think the public bristled at the longshoremen strike because the vast majority of their leverage comes not from (most) of their jobs being particularly high-skill but from the fact that they can unilaterally destroy the entire economy for everyone else. Add to that the fact that their union chief was extremely blunt about the whole thing, and that longshoremen make, on average, triple the average househ…

Fighting for anything but your right to be an asshole has never, ever been popular in the US. The labor wars of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries that led to modern professional comforts like the weekend were wildly unpopular; the women's suffrage movement was unpopular; the civil rights movement to end what we would clearly call Apartheid now was extremely unpopular; MLK was unpopular during his enti…

Believing that they should, just because they can, is a destructive zero-sum worldview.

Re: Perplexity CEO offers AI company's services to replace striking NYT staff

#57

Post by PittleyDunkin »

SauntSolaire wrote: post #56
PittleyDunkin wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fighting for anything but your right to be an asshole has never, ever been popular in the US. The labor wars of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries that led to modern professional comforts like the weekend were wildly unpopular; the women's suffrage movement was unpopular; the civil rights movement to end what we would clearly call Apartheid now was extremely unpopular; MLK was unpopular during his enti…

Believing that they should, just because they can, is a destructive zero-sum worldview.

I don't follow. Can you articulate further the link between doing what you can and zero-sum?

Re: Perplexity CEO offers AI company's services to replace striking NYT staff

#58

Post by from-nibly »

SauntSolaire wrote: post #55
digging wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Human CEOs generally aren't held liable for their actions, so why would AI need to be? Once again, I think we're just smoothing out a wrinkle here.

I know this is more of a throwaway cynical quip, but this is a biased line of thinking. CEO's are, for obvious reasons, more likely to do things they wouldn't be held liable for, versus do things which would see them likely to be punished. So executives might, for example, get away with things by successfully skirting the line of legality. Say an AI CEO blatantly crosses this line, now who is liable?

It's a cheese touch situation. Last human to make a decision.

Re: Perplexity CEO offers AI company's services to replace striking NYT staff

#59

Post by from-nibly »

benreesman wrote: post #49

I like Perplexity as a product. I’ve used the product a bit and was always impressed that it seemed pretty balanced. Why would the leadership of a fairly popular, generally well-liked company with a generally useful, generally well-liked product take a pretty strident stance at the maximally high-temperature moment: fuck labor as a bloc, we’ll cross the strike lines? Don’t technology companies want to avoid this kind…

If it was about giving customers products yeah sure. But it's really about making the stock price go up. Politics is a great way to adjust the stock price. See esg scores.
Post reply on HN