Vibe management

Those same managers eleven seconds later when they get an ad for a new startup making the same obviously empty promises as the last startup:

Yeah no shit. You get people dependent on your product, then Jack up the price

This feels predictable. AI is one of, if not the most invested in yet unprofitable industries in the history of humanity.

The last few years have been the beta and the tech demo. But that is not paying for itself yet. US companies are competing with (and falling behind) Chinese state-sponsored companies. OpenAI in particular, a company whose revenue doesn't even cover half of their operating costs, has extended themselves into owing more than a TRILLION dollars to the entirety of big tech who are building chips and data centers on these IOUs, and will need to be paid sooner or later. The bills will come due.

Other corporations are already paying massive bills for licensing, tokens, training, and infrastructure changes to accommodate this shift to AI while laying off massove chunks of skilled workers on the idea that AI is cheap and will get cheaper over time. But that is simply not the case. This is the "first taste is free" part of this deal. Once they have companies deeply invested in AI and have destroyed the fabric of the labor economy in favor of it, that price is going to skyrocket because OF COURSE IT WILL.

Maybe at some point this will all level out. AI bubble will pop. Prices will sky rocket. Companies will try to backpedal, which will be slow and difficult, they'll end up paying AI companies huge sums while they work to decouple themselves after just forming the bond, they'll also end up paying stupid money to professionals who are suddenly in high demand, and many companies won't survive the chaos. But the ones that do will settle into a new equilibrium.

AI will eventually get cheaper (but probably never this cheap again, at least not in the near future), and it will probably be a permanent fixture in our lives and work to some degree. But it's usefulness and cost effectiveness will be limited in scope, with specialized purposes. It will not ultimately be the great labor replacement companies think/thought it would be, even as stupid and short sighted as that desire is in the first place (if 30% of the global work force is unemployed, how do you think that will effect your revenue, morons!?). But that also is assuming that the coming chaos doesn't turn out so bad that AI is permanently legislated into oblivion after the chaos it's about to cause.

They fired the wrong people. Go higher!

I like how they say “now” like the billionaires won’t keep jacking the fees up.

It’s almost like it was an obvious and stupid pile of lies and shit the entire time. If only literally everyone with a brain had been constantly pointing that out literally the entire time, then we could have done better, right?

Maybe... just maybe... the ones at the top with all the money should not be the ones with the least knowledge and the worst skillsets.

I remember companies doing this with cloud services.

CEO: Get rid of everything on-prem, the cloud sales person said cloud is cheaper!

First year cloud coats are more than 3 year depreciation of on-prem equipment

CEO: Huh...welp it's impossible for me to be wrong, so we're just going to say it was cheaper.

Does AI cost more than humans primarily because of greed (i.e the AI companies demand a high profit margin now) or because of energy costs (i.e AI is so wasteful with energy, so polluting, that it costs more than human workers)

These companies have been tokenmaxxing i.e. judging employee performance based on how many tokens they use, so employees are incentivized to use up as many tokens as possible, even if it doesn't actually improve productivity (and can actually result in the opposite).

The fact that piece of algorithm is getting paid more than a human being, who eat, live, love, is outrageous. Humans are the worst.

It's not about the money, it never was. If it were a matter of costs, subcontractors would have never existed.

They just have wet dreams of businesses that run without having to rely on humans. That's all.

Humans ask for raises, get sick, want vacations or just want to get the fuck out of there and do something else than working. That's communism, in their book: You all not being a bunch of docile slaves.

I don't know who is gonna end up buying the products they sell, anyway...

Add to that the fact that hiring and training a new employee usually costs between 5-10 times more than retaining an employee (from hire to fully trained)

CEOs learning

Bet

But they got to fire a lot of people which is their favorite thing to do.

The fact that it is just a cost comparison, however much humans might still be winning it roght now, is the fundamental problem.

Costing more to do less was kind of written on the wall of capitalism’s halls the whole time, so are we really surprised?

AND it's shit

You would THINK that of all people on the planet, CEOs should understand the enshittification strategy.

...Or the board of directors, or the major investors, etc.

If you outsource the entire value chain of your $million/billion business to the $trillions guys, how do you think that will go? What would YOU do in their place knowing you have all the leverage and none of the risk (re: the smaller companies being bled dry and left to rot)?

It's funny to see it happen to other predatory tech companies like uber though.

Pretty sure the point was to drive down the price of labour?

Rule: if something looks too good to be true, then without any further evidence, it's likely too good to be true.

Don't worry, when they hire back their humans they will be paying them 25%+ less after adjusting for inflation.

This is what happens when you reward people based on token usage. People no joke can just put in before every PR "review every detail, be very thorough, make sure it fits into everything, check for every possible undefined behavior etc." while giving the model a massive doc with list of all files in the project.

Not even sure if they check the prompts because "review formatting of the entire codebase" is also super heavy in a large repo but if prompts get checked it's an obvious token sink.

The model will just ransack the whole project every time through the whole stack when you could enforce a contract with a couple of tests with strict input validation.

Uber has the dumbest AI policy in the industry.

Hahahahaha their greed knows no bounds and they couldn't help but reach and reach and reach further in until they ruined the one actual selling point they had of AI "replace the slaves cheaper!!" They cried waving their arms around "This is the new thing!!" "You won't have to pay people anymore! Think of the profits!!"

And then they went and fucked it up because of how obscenely and unapologetically greedy they are in every single thing that they do. Hahahahahaha oh god, the irony is almost tangible enough you could put it on a plate and eat it.

Good for us, the actual workers of the world. But wow, they are so greedy they couldn't even replace us all with robots effectively because they just want more and more and more and more and more and...

Edit: actually its a more than that. See the below comment.

Rehire and Replace the CEO with AI 😁

Perhaps it is my bias as someone who studied AI at the university, but I never believe it when someone claims to loose job due to AI. AI never fired you, AI never managed to replace you. Your manager is just bad at making business decisions, as most managers are nowadays. Current rich world of big successful companies was built on competent managers, those people are now either dead or too old to work and their replacements will drive us back to the medieval times while pretending they know best.

There are good, valid, profitable uses for AI. They are not pushed by big companies, rather utilized by small actors who fly under radar.

They don't care, they don't want to be in the writing software business or in the human resources business. Cloud is more expensive but they didn't care because they didn't want to be in the data center business.

The tech sector had been over hiring for a decade. The cutbacks were inevitable in any course. Whats funny about it is that by using AI as a standover they are enshittifying their product faster and costing themselves more in the process than if they had just started firing people.

Nonpaywalled version of that article: https://archive.is/HolQ7

An OpenAI investor told Axios that the shift could benefit them, since they view Codex as superior to Claude Code at maximizing tokens efficiently, cutting down on usage costs.

Oh boy, wait till he learns about Chinese models. American AI companies and their investors are in deep trouble 🥳

AI + UBI

A great pairing.

Who doesn't like a great pair?

How long until the AI gains sentience and joins the rest of us on the picket lines?

But... it'll NEVER cost less!

This is such a weird take because we are comparing apple and oranges, again. It's like saying a ruler is more precise than using your own thumbs. Sure, that's technically correct, but you still need people to use that ruler to measure stuff.

We ALWAYS use better tools. Even in mass production we automatize the heck out of everything... and yet you still need staff to maintain it, design improvements, etc.

So... I don't get this kind of comparisons.

Funny thing is that replacing the workforce is pretty much like vibe coding, until everything goes wrong.

If you fire a worker every they know that you don't know is gone then as you replace workforce with so you'll eventually lose more and more critical knowledge.

Also I guess you'll have to have a group of people to review the mistakes it made and feed in the data of broken industrial equipment that the ai broke

Gee, would've been a shame if those workers decide to go on strike. Seriously!

Turn off the AI, and rehire people, done.

• CEOs, guaranteed

Lol ffs ...

"Greedy pos CEO of ShitCo. thinks they're the only greedy pos CEO. Greedy pos CEO of AIslopCo. drains their accounts."

NORMAN!