Well, “career” implies life purpose; in servitude of others for financial compensation. It’s never meant nothing else, so there shouldn’t be any surprises or complaints from people that devote themselves to that.
Not the ladder I’d personally go, but it’s always there. More reward on other ladders.
thegr8goldfish@startrek.website
on 10 Sep 15:49
nextcollapse
The end of jobs is actually a good thing if we can commit to taking care of one another and prioritizing the safety of the human race over the desires of billionaires. So, we’re probably fucked.
Captainvaqina@sh.itjust.works
on 10 Sep 16:49
collapse
I don’t know how to reconcile all these studies saying that AI productivity gains have not materialized and that AI agents are atill uncapable of even the simplest of office tasks with the very measurable loss of jobs.
And I see this same dissonance at my job. Revenue going up, hiring going down, layoffs every quarter and a big push for everyone to use AI. But at the same time basically no real success story from all this increased AI usage.
Probably just me, but I just don’t get it.
realitista@piefed.world
on 11 Sep 01:46
nextcollapse
Big organizations can continue to function with just a fraction of their workforce. But if they start to realize they are falling behind because of this strategy, they will probably stop it. The first has happened in many cases but not the second yet.
Revenue going up, hiring going down, layoffs every quarter and a big push for everyone to use AI. But at the same time basically no real success story from all this increased AI usage. Probably just me, but I just don’t get it.
No, you’ve got it: Revenue increases, short term, when personnel costs are cut, through layoffs and hiring freezes.
The story told (“workers must return to the office to sit on teleconference all day” prompting more of them to quit, or “your job can be done by robots”, or whatever) only needs to make enough sense that the stock holders are satisfied the executives have a sane explanation for sudden loss of workers. Otherwise it might look like the executives are panicking!
threaded - newest
FTFY
It there was a career ladder for a subset of the population for a few decades, but then the ladder was pulled up...
Well, “career” implies life purpose; in servitude of others for financial compensation. It’s never meant nothing else, so there shouldn’t be any surprises or complaints from people that devote themselves to that.
Not the ladder I’d personally go, but it’s always there. More reward on other ladders.
The end of jobs is actually a good thing if we can commit to taking care of one another and prioritizing the safety of the human race over the desires of billionaires. So, we’re probably fucked.
definitely fucked
I don’t know how to reconcile all these studies saying that AI productivity gains have not materialized and that AI agents are atill uncapable of even the simplest of office tasks with the very measurable loss of jobs.
And I see this same dissonance at my job. Revenue going up, hiring going down, layoffs every quarter and a big push for everyone to use AI. But at the same time basically no real success story from all this increased AI usage. Probably just me, but I just don’t get it.
Big organizations can continue to function with just a fraction of their workforce. But if they start to realize they are falling behind because of this strategy, they will probably stop it. The first has happened in many cases but not the second yet.
No, you’ve got it: Revenue increases, short term, when personnel costs are cut, through layoffs and hiring freezes.
The story told (“workers must return to the office to sit on teleconference all day” prompting more of them to quit, or “your job can be done by robots”, or whatever) only needs to make enough sense that the stock holders are satisfied the executives have a sane explanation for sudden loss of workers. Otherwise it might look like the executives are panicking!