• Architeuthis@awful.systems
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    7 days ago

    If the great AI swindle has taught us anything, is that what’s good for normal people isn’t really important when all the macro-economic incentives point the other way and towards the pockets of the ultra rich.

    As of April 2025, only 17% of Americans thought AI would have a positive effect on the US over the next 20 years. Only 23% thought AI would be positive for how people do their jobs.

    robert anton wilson intensifies

  • Bluegrass_Addict
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    34
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 days ago

    ai is dogshit just like the ceos thinking they will make money on this

    • mojofrododojo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      7 days ago

      I find it fascinating that none of the CEOs are confident enough to replace themselves with AI.

      ALL IN, except for uh…

      When actually, LLMs may be uniquely suited for management and tracking progress across many layers, it would render the decision makers victims and they won’t do that.

    • Snot Flickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      22
      ·
      7 days ago

      It’s not even about making money, it’s about replacing human workers with digital slaves while driving down worker pay and driving more humans to desperation and lower pay. Even if they don’t make a massive profit, they plan to replace as many human workers as possible and drive down overall labor costs for the foreseeable future. Just like inflated prices don’t come down, depressed wages won’t come up.

      • fartographer@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        6 days ago

        Yeah, I’ve been thinking for a while that all this AI promotion isn’t about actually replacing workers. It’s to scare away all the talks about liveable wages. And then the reduced wages will be used as an excuse to replace legacy employees who earned raises during the “old wages” times and now, “don’t make sense to keep because they make the same amount as entire teams.”

        • Snot Flickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          6 days ago

          Which, if you think about it, is so absurd because the average LLM is probably more costly in terms of energy used and overall ecological damage than a traditional employee anyway, but since those are economic externalities, the CEOs don’t really care because they don’t see the impact directly on their spreadsheets as it’s the LLM companies paying for power and wrecking nature, while they’re just paying for access to the compute power.