Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by muvlon 13 days ago
Why? Because their messaging is not addressing the general public, but their investors. And they've realized that their investors are really receptive to panic-baiting (we'll get rid of jobs, ASI is right around the corner, p(doom) = 25% etc).
1 comments

This doesn't answer GPs question, though: Why is a panic-baiting "we'll get rid of jobs" better than some gain-baiting "we'll make your workforce 10x more productive"? Why is panic a better response to investors than gain?

We got:

- A: "AI helps in automating tedious tasks"

- B: "Your workforce can be more motivated and productive"

- C: "You can do more with fewer people"

Why not advertise A → B, stop there and let their customers do the reasoning for B → C themselves? Why go straight to a hyperbolic A → C and swallow all the hate that comes with it?

My own presumption is that we got that strange fetish for optimization (C) and just don't trust our own ambitions to make the potential gain in productivity (B) work any other way.

It goes back to Warren Buffett quote "There's class warfare, all right, but it's my class, the rich class, that's making war, and we're winning." That is what it is. I thought it was just funny but wrong comment, but lately realized Buffett was 100% right all along.
Panic just makes it sound more real, I think. They were saying stuff like "Eek, our technology is TOO dangerous and advanced and we need to be regulated :-O" when they definitely didn't actually want to be regulated. ("They" meaning at least Sam Altman).

"Your workforce will be more productive" sounds much less impressive than "OMG you will literally not need employees anymore!! 10x profits!!"

Because it's being sold off as the terminal technology and if you aren't in on the final and ultimate technological innovation you will be for forever behind and never catch up.
Panic switches off the rational part of your brain and makes you act without thinking. Better for anyone who wants to manipulate you.