|
|
|
|
|
|
by OkWing99
26 days ago
|
|
|
The question wasn't about the quality of the work done or a criticism of AI in general. But those were areas where people were employed and got paid to do a job. The output may not have been acceptable from Silicon Valley standards - but they were still employed and paid taxes. It's about whole industries/sectors getting destroyed by a single company. 'Overhiring' is a result of changed business situations. Companies don't overhire hundreds and thousands of people intentionally to let them go. They hired to fill a need. Market conditions changed, competition changed. Entry level hiring is mostly destroyed mainly because of Anthropic's messaging. Other labs don't push that hard on every vertical because they created a skill with some .md files - and pretend is a highly skilled AI. I'm not against Anthropic doing it, I'm just saying what they're doing at the moment. Given enough time, Anthropic will be coming after every job that can be done by a computer - including yours and mine. |
|
|
It’s not something I worry about.
What I, and many of my peers, excel at is taking vague inputs from end users and putting them into actionable specs. Often times this requires considerable education of the end user.
AI might be able to suggest best practices, but getting someone from malformed ideas into an actionable path forward is a very human thing.
Sure, tech-savvy lucid thinking clients with time on their hands might not need my services any more at some point, but… yeah… that’s not my client base.
I get paid to solve business problems. Everything I’ve done in the past could have theoretically been done by my customers, but it wasn’t. AI removes a small amount of the friction for a small portion of the market, but that’s just not a market-wide phenomenon.
“Super smart, super savvy, highly-motivated, and prefer to spend time instead of money” does not describe most business owners.
That’s just my 2 cents…