• N3Cr0@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    106
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    1 year ago

    I predict a huge demand of workforce in five years, when they finally realized AI doesn’t drive innovation, but recycles old ideas over and over.

    • PerogiBoi@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      22
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I predict execs will never see this despite you being correct. We replaced most of our HR department with enterprise GPT-4 and now almost all HR inquiries where I work is handled through a bot. It daydreams HR policies and sometimes deletes your PTO days.

      • Khanzarate@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        1 year ago

        But can you convince it to report itself for its violations if you phrase it like it’s a person?

        • PerogiBoi@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          No unfortunately. A lot of us fucked with it but it keeps logs of every conversation and flags abusive ones to management. We all got a stern talking to about it afterwards.

    • chemical_cutthroat@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      37
      arrow-down
      17
      ·
      1 year ago

      “Workforce” doesn’t produce innovation, either. It does the labor. AI is great at doing the labor. It excels in mindless, repetitive tasks. AI won’t be replacing the innovators, it will be replacing the desk jockeys that do nothing but update spreadsheets or write code. What I predict we’ll see is the floor dropping out of technical schools that teach the things that AI will be replacing. We are looking at the last generation of code monkeys. People joke about how bad AI is at writing code, but give it the same length of time as a graduate program and see where it is. Hell, ChatGPT has only been around since June of 2020 and that was the beta (just 13 years after the first iPhone, and look how far smartphones have come). There won’t be a huge demand for workforce in 5 years, there will be a huge portion of the population that suddenly won’t have a job. It won’t be like the agricultural or industrial revolution where it takes time to make it’s way around the world, or where this is some demand for artisanal goods. No one wants artisanal spreadsheets, and we are too global now to not outsource our work to the lowest bidder with the highest thread count. It will happen nearly overnight, and if the world’s governments aren’t prepared, we’ll see an unemployment crisis like never before. We’re still in “Fuck around.” “Find out” is just around the corner, though.

      • ozmot@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        27
        ·
        1 year ago

        Even mindless and repetitive tasks require instances of problem solving far beyond what a.i is capable of. In order to replace 41% of the work force you’ll need a.g.i and we don’t know if thats even possible.

        • assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          12
          ·
          1 year ago

          Let’s also not forget that execs are horrible at estimating work.

          “Oh this’ll just be a copy paste job right?” No you idiot this is a completely different system and because of xyz we can’t just copy everything we did on a different project.

        • Its not replacing people outright its meaning each person is capable of doing more work each thus we only need 41% the people to achieve the same task. It will crash the job market. Global productivity and production will improve then ai will be updated repeat. Its just a matter of if we can scale industry to match the total production capacity of people with ai assistance fast enough to keep up. Both these things are currently exponential but the lag may cause a huge unemployment crisis in the meantime.

          • localme@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            In this potential scenario, instead of axing 41% of people from the workforce, we should all get 41% of our lives back. Productivity and pay stay the same while the benefits go to the people instead of the corporations for a change. I know that’s not how it ever works, but we can keep pushing the discussion in that direction.

              • 🇦🇺𝕄𝕦𝕟𝕥𝕖𝕕𝕔𝕣𝕠𝕔𝕕𝕚𝕝𝕖@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                What do u replace it with after a revolution? Communism doesnt work capitalism is flawed democracy is flawed but seems to at least promote our freedoms. I think we defiantly need a fluid democracy before we can start thinking about how we solve the economic problems (well other than raising minimum wage that’s a no brainer) without undermining exponential growth.

                • rambling_lunatic@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Capitalism isn’t just flawed, it’s broken. For every prosperous nation like the UK or Germany, there’s half a dozen Haitis and Panamas.

                  By “communism”, I presume you mean Marxist-Leninist state socialism, which indeed fails miserably. However, it isn’t the only alternative to capitalism. Historically, there have been several communes during the Spanish and Russian civil wars that worked fine and didn’t have a central leader, let alone a dictatorship. Although they died because of military blunders, this model is currently being followed more or less in Chiapas by the Zapatistas.

                  In these places, workers’ councils ruled. Direct face-to-face democracy by neighbours were how most things were done. I recon that this is a fairly nice arrangement.

                  Democracy’s flaws come from subversion by the wealthy and the fact that republics don’t let people really participate, but rather choose people who participate in their place.

        • richmondez@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          We are walking talking general intelligence so we know it’s possible for them to exist, the question is more if we can implement one using existing computational technology.

      • jaybone@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        21
        ·
        1 year ago

        I’ve worked with humans, who have computer science degrees and 20 years of experience, and some of them have trouble writing good code and debugging issues, communicating properly, integrating with other teams / components.

        I don’t see “AI” doing this. At least not these LLM models everyone is calling AI today.

        Once we get to Data from Star Trek levels, then I can see it. But this is not that. This is not even close to that.

      • Grandwolf319@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        just 13 years after the first iPhone, and look how far smartphones have come

        I disagree.

        As someone who has the first iPhone, it was amazing and basically did everything that a new one does. It went on all websites, had banking apps and everything.

        I would actually argue phones have become worse, they are very bloated and spy on you, at first they actually made your life better and there was no social media apps super charged for addiction.

    • metaStatic@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      these are the same people who continue to use monetary incentives despite hard scientific evidence that it has the opposite effect from what is desired. they’re not gonna realise shit.

      • SlopppyEngineer@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        The ones refusing to give raises and also being shocked and complain bitterly about loyalty when people quit for a higher wage somewhere else.

    • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      but recycles old ideas over and over.

      I am so glad us humans don’t do that. It’s so nice going to a movie theater and seeing a truly original plot.

  • pjwestin@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    85
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    In my experience, 100% of executives don’t actually know what their workforce does day-to-day, so it doesn’t really surprise me that they think they can lay people off because they started using ChatGPT to write their emails.

    • ShepherdPie@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      26
      ·
      1 year ago

      This was my immediate thought too. Even people 2-3 levels of management above me struggle to understand our job let alone the person 5-6 levels up in the executive suite.

      • pjwestin@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        28
        ·
        1 year ago

        At my last job my direct manager had to explain to upper management multiple times that X role and Y role could not be combined because it would require someone to physically be in multiple places simultaneously. I think about that a lot when I hear about these corporate plans to automate the workforce.

  • xantoxis@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    57
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    1 year ago

    Well it’s good to know 59% of execs are aware that AI isn’t gonna change shit

    • kromem@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      1 year ago

      Some of that 59% might, but I guarantee at least some very strongly think it will change things, but think the change it brings will require as many people as before (if not more), but that they will be doing exponentially more with the people they have.

    • fruitycoder@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Could be they just think there is productivity shortfall and current workforce + plus AI will help meet it. Or just lieing for PR.

      With out more data its just guessing though

      • Hamartiogonic@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        17
        ·
        1 year ago

        As soon as we’ve managed to make a computer that can simulate an entire brain in real time. Who knows how many decades or even centuries will that take.

        • mindlight@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          27
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          No. Middle management is a lot of repeating tasks that an AI could do. The thing is that were not talking about replacing all middle management, we’re talking about giving 10% of the managers the tools to run 90% of the repetitive, tedious and boring tasks.

        • forrgott@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          15
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          To replace a corporate executive? No, I don’t think so. We already have algorithms more than capable of replacing CEOs. There is nothing that challenging in what they do…

          • IsThisAnAI@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            9
            ·
            1 year ago

            It’s amazing how this delusion gets repeated so much in here. Absolute unhinged shit.

    • kromem@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Yes.

      The biggest factor in terms of job satisfaction is your boss.

      There’s a lot of bad bosses.

      AI will be an above average boss before the decade is out.

      You do the math.

    • PixelProf@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I really want to see if worker owned cooperatives plus AI could do help democratize running companies (where appropriate). Not just LLMs, but a mix of techniques for different purposes (e.g., hierarchial task networks to help with operations and pipelining, LLM for assembling/disseminating information to workers).

  • febra@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    29
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Can’t wait for AI to replace all those useless execs and CEOs. It’s not like they even do much anyways, except fondling their stocks. They could probably be automated by a markov chain

    • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Don’t get a job in government contracting. Pretty much I do the work and around 5 people have suggestions. None of whom I can tell to fuck off directly.

      Submit the drawing. Get asked to make a change to align with a spec. Point out that we took exception to the spec during bid. Get asked to make the change anyway. Make the change. Get asked to make another change by someone higher up the chain of five. Point out change will add delays and cost. Told to do it anyway. Make the next change…

      Meanwhile every social scientist “we don’t know what is causing cost disease”

  • EndHD@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    28
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    If Gartner comes out with a decent AI model, you could replace over half of your CIOs, CISOs, CTOs, etc. Most of them lack any real leadership qualities and simply parrot what they’re told/what they’ve read. They’re their through nepotism.

    Also, most of them use AI as a crutch, so that’s all they know. Meanwhile, the rest of us use it as a tool (what it’s meant to be).

  • randon31415@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    27
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    AI will (be a great excuse to) reduce workforce, say 41% of people who get bonuses if they do.

    • neo@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      1 year ago

      Game’s changed. Now we fire people, try to rehire them for less money and if that doesn’t work we demand policy changes and less labour protection to counter the “labour shortage”.

  • fruitycoder@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    24
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    41% execs think that a huge amount of class power will go from workers in general to AI specialists (and probally the companies they make or that hire them).

    I personally can’t wait for a lot these businesses that bet on the wrong people to replace turn around and form new competition but with this new tech filling in the gaps of middle management, hr, execs, etc.

    I mean its fucking meme, but an AI assisted workplace democracy seems alright to me on paper (the devils in details).

    • NocturnalEngineer@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Execs don’t give a shit. They simply double down on the false cause fallacy instead. They wouldn’t ever admit they fucked up.

      Last year the company I work for went through a run of redundancies, claiming AI and system improvements were the cause. Before this point we were growing (slowly) year on year. Just not growing fast enough for the shareholders.

      They cut too deep, shit is falling apart, and we’re loosing bids to competitors. Now they’ve doubled down on AI, claiming blindness to the systems issues they created, and just made an employee’s “Can Do” attitude a performance goal.

    • Sanctus@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      1 year ago

      Lets try it. I am willing to start a worker coop headed by votes and an AI. Fuck it.

  • bean@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    And that means lower prices for consumers. Right? Guys… r… right?

    • kent_eh@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      23
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      And that means lower prices for consumers. Right? Guys… r… right?

      No, but it does mean 41%fewer people can afford to buy these companies products, you cheapass shortsighted corporate fucks.

      • nexguy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        More businesses will be started to make the products since the profit margin is suddenly so high… driving down prices.

  • TheKrunkedJuan@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    1 year ago

    As someone scripting a lot for my department in the tech industry, yea AI and scripts have a lot of potential to reduce labor. However, given how chaotic this industry is, there will still need to be humans to take into account the variables that scripts and AI haven’t been trained on (or are otherwise hard to predict). I know the managers don’t wanna spend their time on these issues, as there’s plenty more for them to deal with. When there’s true AGI, that may be a different scenario, but time will tell.

    Currently, we need to have some people in each department overseeing the automations of their area. This stuff mostly kills the super redundant data entry tasks that make me feel cross eyed by the end of my shift. I don’t wanna be the embodiment of vlookup between pdfs and type the same number 4+ times.

  • boatsnhos931@lemmy.worldBanned
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Execs? The same people who make short sighted decisions and don’t understand basic psychology? Let me go get a pen so I won’t…give two fucks what this bogus survey says. Let AI run your business so I can have some excitement in my life

    • xenoclast@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Let’s get rid of corporate profits for shareholders. If your actually want to fix the problem. Make it illegal for shareholders to profit more than employees