• NottaLottaOcelot@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      25 days ago

      That’s an interesting thought. Do you think they will downsize boards of directors and slowly whittle away the executives? Either they won’t stand for it to ensure that they and their friends all stay rich, or they can use it to exclude the people they disliked all along and it can be a slow voting out like reality TV. The general egoistic nature of most billionaires makes me lean toward the latter

    • Bytemeister@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      25 days ago

      It won’t. AI doesn’t fire anyone. AI doesn’t replace anyone. AI shows the potential of doing the same job as a human, so another human fires that person and replaces them with an AI.

      The CEO isn’t going to fire himself. His “replacement” with AI is going to be him using it to make decisions, and feeling so smart about “using all the tools available”, but he’ll still be there to collect a paycheck.

  • Zos_Kia@jlai.lu
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    25 days ago

    It’s amazing to me how fast the executive class jumped on the notion of replacing their workers, although it was obviously too early to know. The idea makes them salivate so much that they showed their hand immediately like children before candy.

    I think the class divide will take a long time to recover. Basically every boss in the world declared to the public, including their own employees, how eager they are to just fire the lot of them.

  • Uranus_Hz@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    25 days ago

    Building data centers is expensive. But they are an essential part of the AI surveillance state infrastructure that the Trump-Epstein class wants for complete control.

    So this is just a short term expense. It will become much cheaper, like any new tech.

  • renrenPDX@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    25 days ago

    This is more like what we imagine it’s going. In reality, they couldn’t care less and will shift gears to keep the line going up and cutting costs. If full AI adoption won’t work, then they’ll shift resource direction to what they are already experienced in: outsourcing to SE Asia (with AI sprinkled on top).

  • violentfart@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    26 days ago

    Long ago I learned in an economics class that business is all about exploitation of underprivileged populations. From indigenous people to slaves to poor citizens to “third-world” countries.

    Corporations are running out of people to exploit globally, so the idea of infinite artificial labor is the holy grail of cost optimization.

    • jatone@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      26 days ago

      and what will likely happen is when they finally develop it, suddenly that thing deserves to not be exploited.

      • fizzle@quokk.au
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        26 days ago

        Nah. I haven’t seen a convincing argument that gen AI is going to coalesce from this shit show.

            • Have you interacted with Fable? It scored on ARC AGI 3 and is pretty dang impressive at everything I’ve thrown at it. They’re solving problems humans haven’t. They’re just senile. Also is calling something “arguable” really an assertion? More of a headscratcher than a real question, I suppose.

        • jatone@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          26 days ago

          never said it would. I’m asserting that by the time AI gets to the point where its as useful as humans, it’ll inherently be as deserving of autonomy and freedom as we are. which brings you back to being required to pay a living wage.

          • fizzle@quokk.au
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            26 days ago

            My point is, I don’t believe the current AI tech is going to get to the point where it’s as useful as humans.

            We have long since reached the point where diminishing returns make significant improvements or advancement unfeasible.

            • TheLegendaryAssholeOfJushinLiger@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              25 days ago

              That’s not true. Mythos annihilated everyone’s benchmarks and now the other companies are all distilling it. They’re solving equations that people haven’t solved, and they weren’t meant to do that. Mythos apparently is designing drugs even though it wasn’t trained with that in mind at all. Anthropic launched an entire pharma wing. It looked like things had plateau’d there for a minute but it’s back to becoming more real.

              • fizzle@quokk.au
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                25 days ago

                This is the same old hype really.

                Yes, there are things which todays generation of AI is good at, including medical research.

                That’s not an indicator of general intelligence.

                • vala@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  25 days ago

                  Really good at some stuff = AGI bro.

                  You gotta look at the benchmarks bro.

                  Just one more generation bro. I swear it’s almost AGI bro.