[kubb]

I’m pretty sure the one place people will never believe AI can be applied is “being a founder”.

There’s just too much invested, in terms of beliefs and money into the idea that founders are special and therefore deserve seven-eight figures off of the capital pumped into their unprofitable products.

You’ll see it here in comments. People will defend A”I” applied to software engineering wherever (not) possible, but building companies? Now listen buddy there’s an irreplaceable human genius at work.

[mentalgear]

Exactly, I always find it ridiculous how the suits, any layer of mid-managment to executives, are so eager on AI 'outsourcing' everything, but they themselves think the 'outsourcing' (if it really works) would stop just before their position.

[Imustaskforhelp]

I agree with you and adding on to it,

Anecdotally, Someone I know said that their manager just asks them if they have drank water or not and motivate them, and the company wants them to make on their personal time what they are building with AI and showcase it.

So they were joking that they were building a replacement of their manager using Claude, and although they were joking, but only partially.

If anything, the managers, rationally speaking might be the one to be outsourced.

Of course, though recently I have come to realize that world isn't completely rational but I have found that on the long term, it still rewards for rational behaviour (sometimes) so I think that these managers on Linkedin should feel a bit scared... (as they are probably just prompting AI to write the linkedin-texts)

What if they are already scared and this is their way of coping with it? Nobody wants their job to be redundant and I wouldn't say that tech is completely scott free but rationally I find that tech has this taste/authenticity factor and there are too many factors but I must admit that these AI companies are succeeding in trying to force the narrative about jobs being completely redundant combined with job market, to make the labour vs capital divide even larger.

I feel as if this is why people want to be on that side of the battle and this Linkedin-Ai-founder-syndrome is a symptom not the cause.

We engineers are trying to optimize from the tech side through let's say AI to building lots of tools that we otherwise couldn't have had made due to lack of time but we had many ideas from any issues we face at tinkering/work etc..

and the managers not having to do any of it, lack the ideas in that aspect but they succeed in trying to project something even if the reality of that thing doesn't exist. So they are trying to do that.

I don't know, I don't believe much in the divide of engineer vs manager but the fight is larger than it but we are infighting...

We are all just fighting to get to the other side of the line of a broken system but oh well, so it is and I am unsure in what capacity can we fix it but I still hope deep down that things will improve for better because I guess hope is what makes us human.

[empath75]

I demo'd an automated agent platform here and showed it doing PRs, and the CEO asked me what i'd do for a living after this did all my work for me, and I said, "What do you think that you do that an agent can't do?".

[kelseydh]

While you're not wrong the problem is they own the company or the board listens to them. They have power they can use to keep existing while you don't. This is why AI is so scary to working professionals.

[jstummbillig]

Why would that be true? Successful founders have to be unsentimental by nature. If you make it harder on yourself than it has to be, you just get killed by people who don't.

[swiftcoder]

You know, I've been fairly convinced we could automate CEOs away since... ChatGPT 3.5 or thereabouts?