[bigstrat2003]

> The only prediction that I think is robust is: Those who use AI as tool today will replace those that aren't tomorrow.

That's not a robust prediction. Many people who don't use AI today simply don't do so because they've tried it, and found it subtracts value. Those people will not be replaced tomorrow, they will merely reevaluate the tool and start using it if it has started to add value.

[criley2]

If jobs were based on self-perceived value addition there would never be a layoff ever

Your executive team is going to "remove" non-AI folks regardless of their claims about efficiency.

Just like they forced you to return to office while ignoring the exact same efficiency claims. They had realestate to protect. Now they have AI to protect.

[moron4hire]

"Now they have AI to protect," you're ultimately talking about corporate leadership being susceptible to the sunk cost fallacy here. But AI investment is a particularly easy sunk cost to get out of compared to real estate. Real estate has lease obligations and moving costs; it will cost you a lot more in the short term to get rid of your real estate. AI you could just stop using and immediately see cost reduction.

[ffsm8]

There are trillions invested innit at this point.

50 year lease write off would be peanuts compared to what's been invested with the expectation of payouts

[criley2]

The entire American tech industry will implode in a bubble pop if AI doesn't pan out.

I argue that real estate was a smaller problem than this AI bubble behemoth they've created. And now everyones retirement is wrapped up in it.

[113]

Then the answer isn't to adopt AI it's to unionise.

[xoac]

I upvoted both posts

[mostlysimilar]

As always, the answer is that we need to found our own companies and stop letting the vampires suck our blood.