499
wont be laughing once the board fires him in place of AI
I wonder how excited he will be when bis company tanks.
Luigi gets extremely excited firing bullets at CEOs tracked by AI
Why are you bringing an innocent person into this
If you put a giant button in front of these people and said if you push the button you'll get 1 million dollars but someone will die, they'll have not only slammed the button before you are done with the sentence, but will seemingly have sped up pushing it after you've finished. Literal antisocial behaviour that would be pathologized if they weren't affluent.
TBF, I could sacrifice one person and use that million dollars to save hundreds of lives. Trolly problem, I have to pull that lever.
Esp if you can pick the person. Remote plumbing with a cash reward sounds good to me.
To be fair we've seen dozens of CEOs and boards of directors get prematurely thrilled about the idea of replacing high-paid jobs with AI (or at least with AI and some lower paying jobs to curate the good slop from the eldritch horrors and hallucinations).
This guy is being semi-self-aware at least, and they all need to be reminded the economy despairs for good jobs
Also, I bet a nickel if we looked at his clerical staff we can find bullshit jobs there to keep clerks running around so he feels important while he walks through the office. Take those guys and let them work at home as part of the LLM team. I bet they'd appreciate doing real work (and skipping the commute).
Right now it takes specialists with a solid LORA game to make generative AI produce functional results. If we acknowledged this, then we'd either integrate AI as a new tool for doing stuff or we'd ditch it and keep our artists and experts. (And, with newfound appreciation for them, give them a raise?)
Also I still stand by the notion that well-treated, well-paid workers are productive workers. It was recently affirmed by a farm expert noting that prison inmates are outperformed by low-paid undocumented laborers who are outperformed (in turn) by well paid workers (documented or otherwise.)
We could make capitalism work if our bourgeoisie wasn't so busy trying to be aristocrats and hyper-bigots.
Or we could nationalize AI development like China in a step towards post scarcity, but that would likely require violent revolution.
@uriel238 The race to off-board labour leaves me, repeatedly, with the unanswered question: Once enough people are out of work, who's going to BUY what these companies are selling? How do they expect to survive in an economy with permanent, historically high unemployment?
It's a very good question. Our ownership class isn't exactly bright and they haven't been thinking past the next business quarter since the wolf of wall street 1980s. TBH I'm not quite sure if upper management of large corporations actually know what they're doing, but they're too powerful in top-down management hierarchies. Elon Musk has well proven he doesn't at all know what he's doing, but is too wealthy to be challenged or questioned.
Poetically, the story of replacing high-skill jobs with AI systems would end the same way The Brain Center at Whipples ended. It was a Twilight Zone episode about automation of factory jobs, in which the boss who fired everyone gets replaced (with Robbie the Robot).
In fact, if boards of directors are smart, they might look at automating all or part of the upper management process: There are serious decisions to be made at the top (e.g. managing project creep and setting reasonable deadlines based on scope; keeping Parkinson's Law in check on all fronts.
The thing is we can see from the outside that our typical XOs fail at effectively doing this kind of management. It was evident to me in the AAA game industry. Top management has routinely pushed up deadlines, and has routinely crunched their teams (which still doesn't help) and has routinely churned out underbaked, under-tested, buggy AF games that are really just fronts for micro-transaction vending (despite a $70 release price point), and all the pre-release hype only exacerbates the disappointment.
Right now AAA games are being given the private equity treatment, and we're watching dev teams get sinkholed like Toys 'R Us. I'd expect management computers could be programmed not to run the business for its own ego, and not to rely simply on what the company traditionally did.
That said, we're heading towards the reality of Ayn Rand's fantasy when all the takers have been disposed of, and the makers are left: to their horror, they really can't make stuff without the experience and knowhow of the working class, something John Deere discovered a few years ago when the execs decided to try their own hand at unskilled jobs, causing industrial disasters as a result.
Maybe after enough disasters, industrial and natural, we'll collectively come to understand why Chesterton's Fence needed to be there in the first place. Sadly it looks like it's still going to get worse before it gets better.
That's great that they were able to replace people with equipment that they own and control. Oh what's that? The price and capabilities of this AI can change at any time?
Very safe and cool investment.
Maybe he should try Viagra rather than firing people in order to get hard? Seems healthier.
His company will probably fail in the near future.
player 2, insert coin
If I was a shareholder I would automatically call for the firing of any CEO who even starts talking about AI.
No matter how many examples we get of companies doing this and everything falling apart there's always another CEO planning on doing it. Apparently the main requirement of being the CEO is you don't learn, and arrogantly announce nonsense to the media. If you can manage simultaneous walking and spitting, you're probably overqualified.
AI has its places. It's a tool and will/should never replace a skilled worker
These fuckers are so thirsty for more profits they're trying to cut out thier biggest line item against profits. Humans.
Wait until the shareholders discover that with $0.01 in API tokens a LLM can do the same "job" of a CEO, if not even better. And if the decision is unpopular just blame the algorithm! "Sorry we will switch to ceomind_v2_2065_06_04"
Honestly I think AI would do a ton better at replacing humans the higher up the food chain you start.
Replace a CEO with AI and then the lower levels. Keep all the foot soldiers and give them a bump or higher more to scale out and lower workload.
Says CEO of company providing other companies with AI services to replace staff. So, no surprises?
If they think middle and upper managers can’t be replaced with AI…
I assumed they have been for 40 years. And I'm 41.
He should be excited, he will live in interesting times!
Yeah... fuck that guy
CEOs are next, though.
That's what I don't get, if this stuff is supposed to be saving money for the shareholders, surely the CEO sees the writing on the wall.
They had enough money, they want to "consumate" their position of power, by leaving a few peasants homeless.
Yeah but it'll come for them. The CEO makes a lot of money and is often times just a decision maker and spokesman. Both things that the "bros" are saying will be able to be done via AI, soon enough.
Tech bro are very excited to grifft CEIs with AI
Oh, fuck. I really went onion-free with this one.
this post was submitted on 31 Jul 2025
499 points (100.0% liked)
Not The Onion
17457 readers
1100 users here now
Welcome
We're not The Onion! Not affiliated with them in any way! Not operated by them in any way! All the news here is real!
The Rules
Posts must be:
- Links to news stories from...
- ...credible sources, with...
- ...their original headlines, that...
- ...would make people who see the headline think, “That has got to be a story from The Onion, America’s Finest News Source.”
Please also avoid duplicates.
Comments and post content must abide by the server rules for Lemmy.world and generally abstain from trollish, bigoted, or otherwise disruptive behavior that makes this community less fun for everyone.
And that’s basically it!
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS