71–80 of 303 posts
Has anyone done the math on how many jobs AI has to replace in order to justify current valuations? Would be interesting to see imo
It does not matter at this stage is an excuse for layoffs or not. The entire world should impose sanctions on the US for the largest IP theft in history until the laundering companies are illegal (and the waterways closed due to US wars are open). If this administration works against its people and the whole world, maybe there should be a regime change. Peaceful version of Jan 6th. All the unemployed have little to l…
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.
Anybody reading hackernews that cares about GDP growth is profoundly misinformed.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/income-needed-get-ahead-145k-ha...
This is intentional. Companies are actively trying to develop capabilities to replace humans. I am surprised there are not enough protests against this.
I think people are blaming AI for a recession caused by trump’s tarrifs and the oil crisis. Businesses fear that oil prices may explode until enough of the economy enters a recession that oil demand decreases, and are already feeling the supply crunch
This comment is completely divorced from the facts given in the article. The main point is that certain types of jobs like customer service reps, secretaries and sales people are being disproportionately affected. If it was just general fears about the economy overall one would expect a more broad-based impact.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This comment is completely divorced from the facts given in the article. The main point is that certain types of jobs like customer service reps, secretaries and sales people are being disproportionately affected. If it was just general fears about the economy overall one would expect a more broad-based impact.
If you replace customer service with LLMs I will look for a way to stop doing business with you.
This is intentional. Companies are actively trying to develop capabilities to replace humans. I am surprised there are not enough protests against this.
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.
This is a conspiracy theory, but I suspect that VC-backed tech industry overhiring circa 2020/2021 was partially done to give this impression.
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.
I think the bigger issue is that management clearly have no idea how to tell which people are actually working. Output could be higher with less people but the situation that managers have crafted is the maximum number of people with minimum level of output. Not good. The answer to every problem at my place is: more headcount, productivity drops further and further, more headcount, more headcount.
I suspect the economy would look very different if total headcount in a manager's org was the denominator in a manager's performance review, such that if you employ 10x as many people, you better have generated 10x as much profit. But this would also have lots of unintended consequences: management would be incentivized to employ as few people as possible, which means lots of people would be out of work and would be competing with your firm.