• Dryad@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    30
    ·
    1 day ago

    5% of those layoffs will actually be AI related. The other 95% will be profits related.

  • melfie@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    69
    ·
    1 day ago

    Correction: 99% of CEOs are planning to use AI as an excuse to layoff employees to juice quarterly profits. They have zero accountability and golden parachutes, so no skin off of their asses.

  • gravediggersbiscuit@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    25
    ·
    1 day ago

    This type of reporting is frustrating and I really should get off the internet.

    These surveys are done by consultanting companies that have large investment holdings. For example in this report one of the surveys is from Mercer, who has an investment wing that has a AUM (asset under management) 1 of $727 Bn according to their website 2. Would there potentially be any sort of chance someone like Mercer never put out a survey that goes against the bullish market driven by AI speculation? Obviously journalists won’t think about these things anymore because that will effect their click rate.

    1. https://www.investopedia.com/terms/a/aum.asp
    2. https://www.mercer.com/solutions/investments/
    • Lon3star@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      43
      ·
      2 days ago

      Exactly this… Even ones actually attributed to AI will likely be an overreach that won’t be realized until after a person’s life has been totally upended… Shit’s gonna be bleak

    • masterspace@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      29
      ·
      2 days ago

      This is too dismissive.

      Industrialization and automation has already eliminated an entire class of work that was otherwise there.

      In a hunter gathered society or an early industrial society there was always work for everyone, in modern capitalist society, there quite frankly isn’t, and that leads to huge numbers of people just being cast aside.

      And AI may wipe out a huge number of the rest. I genuinely can’t possibly fathom how it will do anything but exacerbate every single one of society’s problems.

      • dexa_scantron@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        32
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        2 days ago

        LLMs are not and will never be good enough to replace human labor. Augment it, sure, and that could lead to fewer jobs but that’s not generally what happens. They are, however, good enough for execs to think they can replace human labor.

        • JohnEdwa@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          2 days ago

          The AI doesn’t need to be better than the professional it’s replacing, it just needs to be more cost effective than the barely capable outsourced worker the jobs was going to be given anyway.

          • CommanderCloon@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            1 day ago

            Not really, because when an employee fails their task it’s the employee’s responsibility, and if it’s catastrophic enough it can lead to firings or lawsuits. But as soon as it’s a chatbot, the liability fully rests on the company. How long will insurance protect those companies too?

          • farting_gorilla@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            2 days ago

            It even can be a feature if AI isn’t as good as the people they are replacing. For example, in the case of call centers/help lines, it might be more desirable to have a shitty system to discourage callers yet have plausible deniability…

            I find I’m referencing Cory Doctorow a lot lately…

        • BarneyPiccolo@lemmings.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 day ago

          The AI won’t replace labor, automation/robotics will do that. AI will provide the brain to operate the automation properly. We’ve had the automation for a long time, the AI is making the difference.

          They are working very hard on the intersection of AI and Automation to replace human labor.

      • Clbull@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        11 hours ago

        The industrial revolution created loads of new jobs in manufacturing, logistics, distribution, procurement and transport.

        The digital revolution created loads of IT, cybersecurity and programming jobs.

        AI removes most if not all the human labour from the equation if it functions properly. What new jobs has the AI revolution created or will create? Because last I checked, “prompt engineer” is not a job title. I can’t even find any fucking jobs for it anywhere from a LinkedIn search.

        (sigh)

        I’d prefer tech-bros pushing crypto, Web3 and NFTs to something that can actually cause mass unemployment and societal collapse.

        And AI may wipe out a huge number of the rest. I genuinely can’t possibly fathom how it will do anything but exacerbate every single one of society’s problems.

        I can see things going one of two ways:

        1. Society gets its shit together, uses AI, robotics and sweeping economic reforms to build new infrastructure and create an abundance of resources. Housing shortages, hunger, thirst and famine become a thing of the past, we move towards a post-scarcity utopia.

        2. The far more likely scenario. Mass unemployment leads to civil unrest, quelled through violence.

      • HobbitFoot @thelemmy.club
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        1 day ago

        There is a question of timeline. Maybe in 10+ years, but not 2.

        The early wave of layoffs in the sector “due to AI” were at the same time as the interest rate went up, pushing all tech companies to start focusing on profit. A lot of unprofitable divisions were cut because it stopped making financial sense to invest in products that didn’t have day 1 revenue.

        You’re now seeing companies doing layoffs and claiming AI to either hide that development in their companies have stalled or they are taking advantage of their new shiny remote work platforms to push wages down by shifting workers to places with lower cost of living.

        AI labor isn’t worth its tokens, even when they are heavily discounted to gain market share. It might be in a decade, but not now.

      • mabeledo@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 day ago

        I keep seeing these comments where AI is hailed as the next industrial revolution, but I think they all miss the point.

        Industrialization created jobs. There were fewer skilled jobs lost than new skilled jobs created. It then created the need for more knowledge based jobs, like civil engineers.

        The AI lobby is doing the opposite. It targets higher paid skilled jobs. If they were to succeed, they would give birth to the opposite of the Industrial Revolution.

    • andallthat@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      well, not in the sense of “layoffs because AI can do those jobs”, but still AI-driven in the sense of “AI did most of the actual grunt work of laying off those people”.

      If there is a repetitive and predictable activity that can be automated at this point it’s layoffs. Announcements and internal talking points are already clearly LLM-generated.

  • CapuccinoCoretto@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    52
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 day ago

    I expect 99% of CEOs to get laid off. They are too lazy, expensive and don’t want to work. They have a ridiculous sense of entitlement. Ripe for automation.

    • nucleative@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      2 days ago

      When you say CEOs are you thinking of guys who are making millions with staff living on almost nothing?

      • III@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        Someone’s gotta see the benefit of not paying those people. They don’t do anything except take the blame for shareholder decisions.

  • cley_faye@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    1 day ago

    Would you look at that. They kept pushing layoff all the time for fake reasons to increase immediate profit, and now they’ll have another fake reason to do mass layoffs for maximum immediate profit.

    What? AI? Who cares about that at this point. It’s like a pretty ribbon on a big gift box to shareholders.

  • Arrandee@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    68
    ·
    2 days ago

    You know, a year ago people in charge were all, like nooo we’re not going to fire people and pocket the payroll savings

    When did we cross the line where everybody stopped lying? I mean, our vaunted business leaders dropping the bullshit is welcome, even if its bad news… but the interesting bit is in the collective, unconscious decision to just own up to this as the likeliest future.

    • Snot Flickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      65
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      The Trump admin has emboldened the entire upper echelons of society to drop pretense because enough of society is stupid enough to always buy it even if its painfully obvious that they are lying. They feel untouchable with their buddies in charge.

      • Aceticon@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 day ago

        Exactly - the more easilly the “riff-raff” is to swindle or the less capable they are to push back, the more intensely and shamelessly the “upper” classes take advantage of the rest.

        You don’t just see it in the historical trends (such as ever more reduced levels of broad representativeness of elected politicians in for example the US or Britain), you also see it across nations: for example after the 2008 Crash, the wealthy in France (with its tradition of public rebellion) were actually saying they should be taxed MORE, whilst the wealthy in England (whose closest to “public” rebellion ever was the Barons rebelling against the King leading to the Magna Carta) were openly lobbying the Government to be taxed LESS (and got what they asked for, with Britain endind up in Austerity, with the anger caused by it being successfully redirected against Immigrants and The EU, hence Brexit, so the wealthy were totally right in not fearing the “riff-raff”).

        PS: that spirit of not provoking the streets of wealthy French did not survive the Macron years, especially once he won against the “Gilet Jaunes” (Yellow Vests).

    • paranoia@feddit.dk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      In my view it is. It’s a race to the bottom. What is a company going to do when they are in a competition with other firms that have less staff but the same output (i.e., a much lower cost base)? The options are either to go out of business or to restructure to the market reality. This is a problem that needs to be solved at the government level.

      • SterlingArgent@piefed.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        That might be the case if AI were actually as competent as humans and actually cheaper. AI may be faster, but they aren’t going to get any cheaper, and LLMs won’t get much more “competent” than they are now.

        • paranoia@feddit.dk
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 day ago

          AI is getting cheaper every year and the output is becoming better. Look at token prices. The so called frontier models are not that far ahead of the open source models that you or I can run essentially for free, either.

          The reality is that you can sit down and automate significant tasks with AI in an afternoon, today. I work in an industry where a significant amount of time is spent auditing and QAing output. A properly trained skill for Claude is able to do the same QA task to 90% of my (senior) level in 2% of the time. Similarly, it is able to coach the junior staff to produce work that is a much higher level than would be otherwise expected of them, reducing the actual audit length on that side too.

          I am hugely positive for the future of AI. I am hugely negative about what it means for people.

    • squaresinger@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      1 day ago

      Including Nvidia in the revenue figure is like asking “Is playing in a casino profitable” and including the revenue of the house in the stats.

    • Clbull@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      I think it’s only a matter of time.

      Waymo already exists in some parts of the US and is being trialled in Atlanta and London. Miso Robotics already can automate manual work in kitchens and have their bots rolled out in fast food chains like White Castle. Claude is miles ahead of competitors in terms of output quality, and there are probably a lot of AI slop content creators making absolute bank from YouTube, Instagram and TikTok.

      Optimus 3 will be released soon and at a predicted price of $30,000 per robot, it could potentially lead to mass layoffs in warehouses. Because remember, robots don’t get tired, don’t need food, don’t need water, don’t need to piss, don’t need to shit, won’t complain about OSHA violations, and don’t need a paycheck. All that matters is work quality and price

      According to some accounts, China are apparently even further ahead than the US in terms of AI and robotics, but they’re deliberately holding back their rollout of humanoid robots and self-driving vehicles because they know a wide rollout will lead to mass unemployment and civil unrest.

      A big part of the reason AI spend is so expensive is because there’s this huge arms race to throw gargantuan amounts of computing power in the hopes of achieving AGI that way. While I think AGI may be bullshit and unachievable, I think they’ll eventually turn a profit once they stop focusing on throwing trillions at data centres.

      • sunbeam60@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        15 hours ago

        Not just that - it confuses several financial terms.

        CAPEX is one time spend. Revenue is recurring. Take Microsoft, as just one example: They are stuffed with cash abroad - they only bring it home when there’s a moratorium; until then it just sits and waits. It’s much cheaper for Microsoft to spend it outside the US than to take it home - CAPEX that can happen outside the US is often welcomed by the big stock owners as it puts the money to work.

        Revenue happens every year. It’s like saying “is this banana stand profitable?” and then answering by saying “well the shed cost 10 dollars and the bananas sell for 5c”. You need more information to understand whether those are good or bad numbers.

        And I know - there’s always money in the banana stand!

    • DacoTaco@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 days ago

      That really shows who profits from all of this and i can only hope that company would implode

  • k0e3@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    1 day ago

    Anyone know of any publicly traded guillotine producers? I’d like to invest early.