AI is already replacing thousands of jobs per month, report finds
independent.co.uk
independent.co.uk
Is this worth >1 trillion in capex?
For reference, less than 100 billion have been invested into fusion energy — since 1950.
What does fusion energy have to do with labor cost?
Obviously AI is technology that has its own value.
But keeping the labor cost down by just a few percent (and handing that money to company profits) has tremendous leverage.
Our PM/manager should not have taken any vacations :D
Perhaps at call centers and such you are correct, but your comment is as disingenuous as saying the compiler is about getting a stronger position over labor, or the expansion of included libraries, or faster microprocessors, or modern IDEs before AI. The march towards automation, efficiency, and automation in engineering never stops.
Every so often there is a massive leap which results in significant job losses, but that doesn’t mean it’s about labor. Was the release of AWS about labor? It destroyed many Silicon Valley companies as you could now do with $5k what previously took $200k.
Let's take the blame a bit farther back.
Instead of the person writing the article, what about the companies laying people off. It looks much better to say "Costs savings for going to AI" versus "Economic uncertainty in future orders"
This is marketing.
I can't tell how credible the claim is that "increased adoption of generative AI technologies by private employers led to more than 10,000 lost jobs".
How is that replacing?
It may make working for a non-software-primary company as a programmer more risky. But then, "be a value provider, where execs can draw a fairly straight line from your contribution to revenue, and not a value consumer" is not new career advice.
See the jobless recovery after 2008 and how long it took the economy to get back on track.
There are many people in this world, to whom truth and reality are fungible, malleable, unimportant things in the face of their agendas. These same people are overrepresented at the highest rungs of the corporate ladder, in the highest echelons of the halls of power in our world.
For them, right 70% of the time is more than good enough, because that which is real has always taken a back seat to that which is expedient.
So what if the Plagiarism Engine spews Confidently Stated Bullshit 30% of the time? They themselves do that at least as often, and for far more than the cost of what LLM's demand per call. Besides, they're so used to "perception=reality" that they figure for the 30% Confidently Stated Bullshit, they can just paper over it, bully, disconcert and repeat until reality matches their expedient bullshit.
The sad thing is, so much of our economy and society is based on bullshit and scams now, they may not be wrong. In fact, they're probably right, for at least a significant percentage of the populace who believes chemtrails are making the frogs gay etc.
I suspect some very hard lessons will need to be learned from disciplines where rigor is required 100% of the time, else lives are lost, and lives will be lost, because the business idiots will continue to shoehorn this garbage in everywhere they possibly can, to sustain the hype cycle bullshit they're all cashing in on. Only once many lives have been lost, and the link conclusively drawn to the garbage spewed by these statistical wordcloud predictive autocorrect machines, then we might see a modicum of forceful pushback. But I ain't holding my breath