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

Generative AI as Seniority-Biased Technological Change

papers.ssrn.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 197 posts

Re: Generative AI as Seniority-Biased Technological Change

#61

Post by neutronicus »

basscomm wrote: post #51
Workaccount2 wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Kids are always the best with technology. The generation in high school right now will be god tier at getting results from LLMs.

Not even a little bit. Where I work we regularly churn through kids just out of college and most of them don't have Clue One how to operate anything on their computer.

Yeah, growing up in the 80s or 90s might have had you uniquely well-positioned to be "good with computers", because "the computer that has games and the internet" was (in some sense) the same as "the computer that adults are supposed to use for work".

That's not true anymore in the smart phone / tablet era.

5-10 years ago my wife had a gig working with college kids and back then they were already unable to forward e-mails and didn't really understand the concept of "files" on a computer. They just sent screenshots and sometimes just lost (like, almost literally) some document they had been working on because they couldn't figure out how to open it back up. I can't imagine it has improved.

Re: Generative AI as Seniority-Biased Technological Change

#62

Post by toomuchtodo »

osigurdson wrote: post #52
toomuchtodo wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They burn out employees until a failure mode is reached.

If a few companies do this it is probably fine, but more interesting if most companies do this. It seems that it would be akin to a self inflicted depression with severe deflation.

From your lips to Blackrock's ears.

Re: Generative AI as Seniority-Biased Technological Change

#63

Post by haijo2 »

apwell23 wrote: post #40

These studies would be more meaningful if this was a time of economic boom. Entry-level jobs get "hollowed out" in a stagnant economy regardless of "AI". AI = not hiring because no new work but spin as a "AI" . Markets are hungry of any utterance of the the word AI from the CEO. so ridiculous. but we've collectively decided to ignore BS as long as we can scam each other and pray you are not the last one holding the b…

Pretty much lol.

You have to somehow have the discipline to avoid getting caught up in the noise until the hype starts to fade away.

Re: Generative AI as Seniority-Biased Technological Change

#64

Post by mingus88 »

petcat wrote: post #36

We had some marketing folks give us a company-wide demo of Chat GPT and some other Gen AI tools and showed us how cool it is and how quick they can make stylish and sophisticated pitch decks and marketing materials now. And the entire time I'm watching this I'm just thinking that they don't realize that they are only demonstrating the tools that are going to replace their own jobs. Kinda sad, really. Demand for soft…

I have the opposite expectation actually

In the late 90s you weee considered a prodigy if you understood how to use a search engine. I had so many opportunities simply because I could find and retain information.

So LLMs have solved this. Knowing a framework or being able to create apps is not a marketable skill any longer. What are we supposed to do now?

It’s the soft skills that matter now. Being well liked has always been more important in a job than being the best at it. We all know that engineer who knows they are hot shit but everyone avoids because they are insufferable.

Those marketing people don’t need to spend a week on their deck any longer. They can work the customer relationship now.

Knowing how to iterate with an LLM to give the customer exactly what they need is the valuable skill now.

Re: Generative AI as Seniority-Biased Technological Change

#65

Post by haijo2 »

ivape wrote: post #43

Another way to look at it is that legacy jobs have no future therefore there is no point bringing in the next generation into a dying system. Another way to look at it is that hiring is fine, and that the vain entitled generation we all suspected was going to emerge feels that a job should absolutely be available to them, and immediately. Another way to look at it is that journalism has been dead for quite a while, a…

The second point has some truth to it from what I've been hearing from talking to senior folks, taking on new grads within the finance sector.

Re: Generative AI as Seniority-Biased Technological Change

#66

Post by ileonichwiesz »

esafak wrote: post #24

The tragedy of the commons: companies acting in their self interest at the expense of the industry by drying up the workforce pipeline. The next generation will pay, like when America stopped producing hardware. This is cause for government intervention.

It should be, but the government loves AI - incidentally it’s also the one thing currently propping up the economy.

Re: Generative AI as Seniority-Biased Technological Change

#67

Post by spacephysics »

elevatortrim wrote: post #49
lukev wrote: post #18

It's pretty clear this is happening. The question is... is this based on existing capability of LLMs to do these jobs? Or are companies doing this on the expectation that AI is advanced enough to pick up the slack? I have observed a disconnect in which management is typically far more optimistic about AI being capable of performing a specific task than are the workers who currently perform that task. And to what exte…

I do not see anything in this study that accounts for the decline in economic activity. Is it AI replacing the jobs, or is it that companies are not optimistically hiring, which disproportionally impacts entry level jobs?

Agree, I think the high cost of full time hires for entry level software jobs (total comp + onboarding + mentoring) vs investing in AI and seeing if that gap can be filled is a far less risky choice at the current economic state.

6-12 months in, the AI bet doesnt pay off, then just stop spending money in it. cancel/dont renew contracts and move some teams around.

For full time entry hires, we typically dont see meaningful positive productivity (their cost is less than what they produce) for 6-8 months. Additionally, entry level takes time away from senior folks reducing their productivity. And if you need to cut payroll cost, its far more complicated, and worse for morale than just cutting AI spend.

So given the above, plus economy seemingly pre-recession (or have been according to some leading indicators) seems best to wait or hire very cautiously for next 6-8 months at least.

Re: Generative AI as Seniority-Biased Technological Change

#68

Post by registeredcorn »

gota wrote: post #14
zeuch wrote: post #3

If entry-level roles are shrinking, how should companies rethink talent development? Without the traditional “bottom rungs,” how do we grow future seniors if fewer juniors ever get the chance to start?

I think open source contributions/projects will still be a way to gain verifiable experience. Other than that, I guess developing software in some capacity while doing a non-strictly software job - say, in accounting, marketing, healtcare, etc. This might not be a relevant number of people if 'vibe coding' takes hold and the fundamentals are not learned/ignored by these accountants, marketers, healthcare workers, etc…

I'm looking forward for the weird inflective trend of "organic" programs, "humane" dev treatment, and software development taking a long time being seen as a mark of quality rather than stagnation or worry. :)

I'm half-joking, but I wouldn't be surprised to see all sorts of counterpoint marketing come into play. Maybe throw in a weird traditional bent to it?

> (Pretentious, douche company): Free-range programming, the way programming was meant to be done; with the human touch!

All-in-all, I already feel severely grossed out any time a business I interact with introduces any kind of LLM chatbot shtick and I have to move away from their services; I could genuinely see people deriving a greater disdain for the fad than there already is.

Re: Generative AI as Seniority-Biased Technological Change

#69

Post by octo888 »

petcat wrote: post #36

We had some marketing folks give us a company-wide demo of Chat GPT and some other Gen AI tools and showed us how cool it is and how quick they can make stylish and sophisticated pitch decks and marketing materials now. And the entire time I'm watching this I'm just thinking that they don't realize that they are only demonstrating the tools that are going to replace their own jobs. Kinda sad, really. Demand for soft…

Experienced that too. They're basically forced to give those demos

Re: Generative AI as Seniority-Biased Technological Change

#70

Post by cryoshon »

Today they're admitting AI is hollowing out entry-level jobs. The reality is that it can and will replace mid-level and eventually even quite senior jobs.

Why?

It's already doing a lot of the loadbearing work in those mid-level roles too now, it's just a bit awkward for management to admit it. One common current mode of work is people using AI to accomplish their work tasks very quickly, and then loafing a bit more with the extra time. So leaders refrain from hiring, pocket the savings, and keep a tight lid on compensation for those who remain.

At some point they'll probably try to squeeze the workforce for some additional productivity, and cut those who don't deliver it. Note that the "ease" of using AI for work tasks will be a rationale for why additional compensation is not warranted for those who remain.

Post reply on HN