this post was submitted on 03 Jun 2024
290 points (96.2% liked)

Futurology

1812 readers
212 users here now

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 35 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Diplomjodler3@lemmy.world 68 points 5 months ago (1 children)

You don't need an AI. Just write a python script that sends emails to everyone once a day admonishing them to work harder.

[–] lurch@sh.itjust.works 31 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

This replaces middle management 🀣

0 10 5 */2 * pizza-party.sh

[–] JackGreenEarth@lemm.ee 6 points 5 months ago (1 children)
[–] whotookkarl@lemmy.world 14 points 5 months ago

Cron scheduling https://crontab.guru/

It's used frequently on Unix computers to execute a script at an interval like every day, week, etc

[–] Takeshidude@lemmy.world 45 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Good! Its not like they do anything but spout corporate jargon word salad and pick which 20% of the company to lay off based on extremely rudimentary data

[–] ChowJeeBai@lemmy.world 15 points 5 months ago

And get paid more than the sum of the wages of the people they laid off, and then some, conservatively, regardless of whether the people were laid off or not.

It's like the cheat code to move the share price, because they can't understand the market.

[–] paddirn@lemmy.world 28 points 5 months ago (3 children)

Do that, redistribute corporate earnings more equitably amongst workers and then we can finally achieve maximum paper clip efficiency.

[–] prole@sh.itjust.works 6 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Lo fucking L

They will destroy the planet before allowing that to happen.

[–] Monument@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 5 months ago

Honestly, it probably depends on whose job is being put on the line and how effective/economical the alternative is.

In public companies a CEO is generally voted in by a board, and a board is voted in by shareholders that seek to maximize value. Situations where CEO’s hold massive amounts of stock, board members holding stock to vote for themselves, and all sorts of collusion and backroom deals for power do exist, but generally, the mass greed of the shareholders can overcome the individual greed of board members or the CEO.

I think an AI-only approach would likely not work in the long-run. Businesses would push their AI’s to be too evil and without a CEO to get arrested, the government would go after the board. However, I could easily see a company taking a chance with some configuration of human/AI decision making, and other company boards using examples of those successes to chip away at CEO pay until it’s, if not normal, then at least not ridiculous.
Heck - there will probably be a whole new profession of business LLM engineer, training these things to be psycopathic but just on the gray side of the law. (I guess they could just give business school professors comp sci classes…)

I guess my point is that I don’t think individual CEO’s would have a choice. Any world destruction would be during the ever-accelerating capitalist bacchanalia enabled by β€˜AI’

[–] grrgyle@slrpnk.net 2 points 5 months ago

The point was never the paperclips though

[–] werefreeatlast@lemmy.world -3 points 5 months ago

AI CEOs don't need money πŸ€‘πŸ’°! And are not personally money driven!

[–] cmbabul@lemmy.world 23 points 5 months ago (2 children)

So I 100% agree most CEOs especially at major companies could easily be replaced by AI, but this also sounds like the start of a dystopian sci fi novel.

[–] Got_Bent@lemmy.world 9 points 5 months ago

It was a twilight zone plot.

It started with a CEO acquiring a robot replaced all the workers to save money and increase efficiency.

Eventually, the robot deemed the CEO inefficient and booted him to the street.

[–] grrgyle@slrpnk.net 8 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (2 children)

Yeah I'm all for dismantling corporate hierarchy, but even as a socialist, I concede that people managers can be workers. They can be valuable.

Just not to the extent that they get to belong to a different economic class.

If it's just going to mean more profit to shareholders (who aren't workers) then, as a worker, and customer, and even as a shareholder, I couldn't care one dried out cat turd's worth if a company is more profitable.

[–] cmbabul@lemmy.world 4 points 5 months ago

Managing people in a workplace is a very valuable skill, I think the issue is IME those with those skills are rarely put in management positions

[–] prole@sh.itjust.works 3 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

Yeah I’m all for dismantling corporate hierarchy, but even as a socialist, I concede that people managers can be workers. They can be valuable.

You're describing the work of middle (or probably more likely, lower level) management. You know, the people actually interacting with the workers.

[–] grrgyle@slrpnk.net 2 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

Yeah I'm being charitable, because there is value in someone who coordinates other high level managers, and handles interacting with the public and other companies.

But without public stocks, the case for a CEO starts to wear thin IMO

[–] AnarchistArtificer@slrpnk.net 20 points 5 months ago (1 children)

CEOs absolutely cannot be replaced by AI because the role that CEOs are meant to fulfill is accountability. When things go wrong, they get passed up the chain, and the CEO is at the top of that chain. Though, it's not like human CEOs are held accountable either, just that in theory, they're meant to be, and AIs would be impossible to hold accountable. Currently, CEOs get the best of all worlds - they get huge bonuses when the company does well, and they are sheltered and fall upwards if the company does poorly

[–] Semi_Hemi_Demigod@lemmy.world 2 points 5 months ago

CEOs should be the boards' whipping boy. Like, literally. Anything the company does wrong is punished by lashings, and the board has to give them to the CEO.

[–] minibyte@sh.itjust.works 15 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (2 children)

The brilliant thing about a breathing CEO is they will be used as a scapegoat if/when something goes wrong – rinse and repeat.

You can only do that with AI once.

[–] jeeva@lemmy.world 26 points 5 months ago

I dunno, it seems easy enough to say "we've got rid of cAIo Colin v1.0 for his clearly insane ideas last year, we're looking forward to bowing to the whims of Colin v1.3, who I hear has some excellent new data sets from last year!"

Or a different product, or whatever. Ew, in any case.

[–] Got_Bent@lemmy.world 5 points 5 months ago

The disgraced CEO takes the golden parachute then moves on to destroy another company because they've got "experience"

[–] EnderMB@lemmy.world 15 points 5 months ago

As the saying goes.

Bosses always tell me I'm lucky to have a job because hundreds of people are lined up ready to replace me. As chance would have it, there are thousands of people lined up to take the job of "rich cunt that tells people what to do"

Farm it off to AI, and have workers validate its choices through whether the move improves employee happiness.

[–] ssm@lemmy.sdf.org 9 points 5 months ago

CEOs are useless, AI is useless, checks out

[–] Fedizen@lemmy.world 8 points 5 months ago

this is true because there's only like two playbooks for bean counter CEOs destroying the world:

A) Enshittify.exe: Fire, Sell, Merge, Union Bust

B) Vulture Capital.exe: Sell assets to ownership portfolio and make business collapse under rental costs.

Like an actual CEO that understands a product and makes good faith effort to ensure both employees and customers are well served is rare and is bad at short term profits (aka discouraged by stock market). This kind of CEO is not replaceable by AI but is highly discouraged by market incentives.

[–] Lucz1848@lemmy.ca 6 points 5 months ago

You could replace the one percent with AI. At least with AI, the complete absence of humanity is easier to understand.

In any case, AI can hoard wealth more efficiently than the one percent, so they should be separated from their wealth for better efficiency of the hoarding. The one percent can then pull themselves up by the bootstraps, and embrace the grindset like the rest of us.

[–] grrgyle@slrpnk.net 2 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Great. More efficient CEOs. Just what the planet needs. More paperclips.

[–] apotheotic@beehaw.org 3 points 5 months ago

No no, think about it. If ceos are gonna be replaced by ai, they're incentivised to stop the trend of implementing ai in their companies (to keep their own jobs). Let this cook.

[–] Resol@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago

Regular CEOs are already pretty bad, I cannot imagine how terrifying AI CEOs will be.

[–] Tikiporch@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago

Just pay a human a reasonable salary to do the job?