US is starting to see heavy job losses in roles exposed to AI • Hacker News Board

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

#91

Post by csallen » Sat, May 16, 2026, 7:48 PM UTC

themafia wrote: post #63

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #41

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.

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

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

#92

Post by hnav » Sat, May 16, 2026, 7:48 PM UTC

raincom wrote: post #74

robberat7 wrote: post #38

This is intentional. Companies are actively trying to develop capabilities to replace humans. I am surprised there are not enough protests against this.

I am happy to see them replace humans with AI machines. However, housing, healthcare, and other insurances have become super expensive. Who is going to buy all the stuff these companies produce? Maybe, it will become a two tier economy: wealthy selling stuff to fellow wealthy people; under ground economy with bartering their trades for food, building shacks for living, flea market dentists, old Wild West style flea m…

Exactly, the “economy” only matters because the ruling classes need the labor. If you could accomplish everything using machines you could have all the resources, beautiful vistas and global warming runway to yourself. Maybe some classical occupations exist like teachers, artisans, actors, sex workers so that the ruling class can still flex on each other.

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

#93

Post by cmiles8 » Sat, May 16, 2026, 7:48 PM UTC

There’s very little evidence of AI replacing jobs en mass.

There a ton of evidence that underperforming companies are trimming fat, with CEOs citing AI impacts rather than their own bad decisions that led to the fat that needed trimming.

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

#94

Post by achierius » Sat, May 16, 2026, 7:49 PM UTC

sakopov wrote: post #23

Most of the job losses are in tech and it all started back in late 2022 and early 2023 arguably before AI was perceived as a real threat. I think after 3 years of tech hiring melting because of all the economic uncertainty people can't see the forest for the trees anymore. Justy $0.02

Is that the case? The article says that the losses were

> led by customer service representatives and certain types of secretaries and salespeople.

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

#95

Post by csallen » Sat, May 16, 2026, 7:49 PM UTC

LogicFailsMe wrote: post #57

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #41

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.

[flagged]

It's depressing to see logic and reasoning in discussion replaced with name-calling and tribalism.

"You're on the side of the " should rarely (if ever) be a valid rebuttal.

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

#96

Post by zapkyeskrill » Sat, May 16, 2026, 7:49 PM UTC

new_account_100 wrote: post #27

lispisok wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the goal is to replace workers who cost $10,000/mo with an AI agent that costs $8,000/mo

$8000/month is way too low. If you're only spending $8000/month on AI you're in drastic danger of being replaced by a more efficient AI firm.

If you replace 100 then that's 800k/mo spend. Would that do?

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

#97

Post by stavros » Sat, May 16, 2026, 7:50 PM UTC

toomanyrichies wrote: post #26

agentifysh wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yet the stock market is reaching ATH, I don't think recession is the accurate word. I also think the fixation on Trump is misleading and takes away from the actual structural side effects of dollar issuance via unbacked fiat. It's convenient scapegoating to take your attention away from the long lingering issue of US dollar dominance and debt that is now causing large social divide and standard of living. The physics…

Note for others - "ATH" => "All-Time High"

Also the IATA code for the Athens International Airport Eleftherios Venizelos, could have meant one or the other, no way to know which.

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

#98

Post by mrandish » Sat, May 16, 2026, 7:52 PM UTC

Losses in job categories management can claim was related to AI.

Some management may even believe AI can fully replace all work done by those positions. In some of those cases they will learn they were mistaken. The eventual rehiring of some positions will happen unevenly over time, be attributed by management to "ongoing growth" and not be reported by the media.

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

#99

Post by krapp » Sat, May 16, 2026, 7:52 PM UTC

Not to worry. I've been assured many, many times that automation only ever creates more, better and higher paying jobs than it removes, and that no one but talentless bottom-feeding hacks are losing jobs to AI anyway, not the elite crème de la crème of HN. So the good times are on their way gentlemen!

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

#100

Post by jdietrich » Sat, May 16, 2026, 7:53 PM UTC

rsoto2 wrote: post #73

bombcar wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Let's use percentage of people below the poverty line ( the actual poverty line is estimated between 97k(single) - 145k(family with children) Anybody reading hackernews that cares about GDP growth is profoundly misinformed. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/income-needed-get-ahead-145k-ha...

As a Brit, it seems hilarious that a single person with an income of $97k would be on the poverty line. That's more than double the median income for all households in the UK. A lot of Americans don't seem to realise how fantastically wealthy they are compared to the rest of the world.

https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/personal...