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

81–90 of 197 posts

Re: Generative AI as Seniority-Biased Technological Change

#81

Post by AlexandrB »

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…

And then the customers use gen AI to summarize the same pitch decks/marketing materials so they don't have to look at them. Let's cut out the middle man and just send the prompt instead.

Re: Generative AI as Seniority-Biased Technological Change

#82

Post by thw_9a83c »

selimthegrim wrote: post #73
thw_9a83c wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Are you serious? No, I was being sarcastic.

Laugh all you want, for some people it’s more real than you think.

I'm not laughing at all. I'm definitely not making fun of those who may be affected by this. My sarcasm was directed at people or companies planning to implement such ideas.

Re: Generative AI as Seniority-Biased Technological Change

#83

Post by roxolotl »

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…

This is the big question. It could be any combination of the following and it likely depends on the company/position too:

- Generative AI is genuinely capable enough to replace entry level workers at a lower cost.

- The hype around Generative AI is convincing people who make hiring decisions that it is capable enough to replace entry level workers at a lower cost.

- The hype around Generative AI is being used as an excuse to not hire during an economic downturn.

Could even still be other things too.

Re: Generative AI as Seniority-Biased Technological Change

#84

Post by carlosjobim »

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 has been like this for decades by now, and your precious government loves this because they also consist of old people who hate the younger generations. Any and every time the government intervenes it is to stomp down on the youth and nothing else.

Re: Generative AI as Seniority-Biased Technological Change

#86

Post by koakuma-chan »

carlosjobim wrote: post #79
thw_9a83c wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't see developed countries to have a "rapidly increasing population" problem.

Practically the whole planet is experiencing population decline now. The poster you're replying to is basing his argument on an obsolete worldview.

Yeah, it felt like we went from 7B to 8B really quickly, but I guess it's over now.

Re: Generative AI as Seniority-Biased Technological Change

#87

Post by pydry »

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?

Exactly this. 2023Q1 was when the interest rate hike from the previous year really kicked in with full force. It was the first hiring market I ever saw in well over a decade where the employers were firmly in the drivers seat even for seniors.

I can imagine that there were a decent number of execs who tried chatgpt, made some outlandish predictions and based some hiring decisions upon those predictions though.

This paper looks kinda trashy - confusing correlation with causation and clickbaity.

Re: Generative AI as Seniority-Biased Technological Change

#88

Post by hackable_sand »

rd wrote: post #71
zeuch wrote: post #2

New Harvard's study (62M workers, 285k firms) shows firms adopting generative AI cut junior hiring sharply while continuing to grow senior roles — eroding the bottom rungs of career ladders and reshaping how careers start.

What was the incentive for companies to train juniors into seniors in the past, post job-hopping era? Curious to know if that incentive has warped in the past two decades or so as someone who's starting their career now.

Companies are organisms

Re: Generative AI as Seniority-Biased Technological Change

#89

Post by JustExAWS »

spacephysics wrote: post #67
elevatortrim wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 meani…

Even then why hire a junior dev instead of a mid level developer that doesn’t need mentoring? You can probably hire one for the same price as a junior dev if you hire remotely even in the US.

Re: Generative AI as Seniority-Biased Technological Change

#90

Post by triceratops »

koakuma-chan wrote: post #34
thw_9a83c wrote: post #29

In the future, there will be two kinds of companies: 1. Those that encourage people to use AI agents aggressively to increase productivity. 2. Those that encourage people to use AI agents aggressively to be more productive while still hiring young people. Which type of company will be more innovative, productive, and successful in the long run?

I don't understand how you want innovation and productivity in a world with rapidly increasing population. We need less and less people while producing more and more people. Where am I wrong?

> in a world with rapidly increasing population

That world was 30 years ago. In 2025 world average total fertility rate is 2.2, which is a shade above replacement rate (2.1). And 2.2 is a 10% drop since 2017 alone (when it was 2.46).

Because life expectancy is higher, the population will continue to increase. But not "rapidly".

Post reply on HN