Anonymous wrote:The link says AI is going to result in 20,000 job losses per month in AI adjacent industries. That’s 240k across a year. The US civilian labor force in employment is 163,992,000 people.

But how many ill it CREATE? That's the unanswered question.

For me, Claude is now better than an entry-level analyst for most things--a lot better. I hate it but it's true. It's going to crush entry level hiring. This will in turn crush higher ed, and create a lost generation. We are betraying our children but there seems to be no way out.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No way AI is way overhyped

This, its not at a level yet where it can replace people.

It's not directly replacing people, but it is making many people vastly more efficient. So, unless a company decides to add 5x the number of features to a product (i.e., create more work), then you need fewer junior people (it's entry level suffering the most).

I use AI a lot, more than anyone else in my office as far as I can tell, and it’s not making me 5x more efficient. I don’t know if it’s quantifiable at all. It’s just a good tool.

We don’t have enough electricity to power AI.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No way AI is way overhyped

This, its not at a level yet where it can replace people.

It's not directly replacing people, but it is making many people vastly more efficient. So, unless a company decides to add 5x the number of features to a product (i.e., create more work), then you need fewer junior people (it's entry level suffering the most).

No way. AI is a smokescreen for offshoring

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No way AI is way overhyped

This, its not at a level yet where it can replace people.

It's not directly replacing people, but it is making many people vastly more efficient. So, unless a company decides to add 5x the number of features to a product (i.e., create more work), then you need fewer junior people (it's entry level suffering the most).

Do you actually use AI at work? I do as I am required to and this means I make up fake reasons to use it as do other employees. This is fair widespread. The C-suite pushing it and investing heavily so we all pretend their investment is worthwhile.

There’s also the question of how much cheaper is AI really to replace employees? The technology is expensive and immense data usage.

I notice most people screaming about AI don’t actually use it.

Anonymous wrote:The "automation will replace jobs" line has existed since the industrial revolution. It hasn't happened yet. Jobs will change, but history suggests that there is no reason to worry about mass unemployment.

Creative destruction is the economics term, and yup people have freaked out about technology and automation forever.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creative_destruction

There was a good podcast interview with PNC's CEO a week ago on the Bloomberg "Odd Lots" podcast, one of the things he talked about was how they are using targeted LLMs to do very specific tasks, basically speeding up the building of an internal knowledge base, and utilizing it to automate tasks like monthly/annual check-ins required for trust accounts. He specifically said "it's not trained on the entire internet, just our internal processes, so it's not expensive to run or train" and "it's not really generative "AI" like how people want to use ChatGPT, it's more just jumps in our automation abilities"

https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/what-it-takes-to-build-one-of-the-worlds-biggest-banks/id1056200096?i=1000746667687

Are these tools useful? Absolutely. Will these broad investments in hundreds of billions (trillions?) of dollars pay off? Probably not!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No way AI is way overhyped

This, its not at a level yet where it can replace people.

It's not directly replacing people, but it is making many people vastly more efficient. So, unless a company decides to add 5x the number of features to a product (i.e., create more work), then you need fewer junior people (it's entry level suffering the most).

Anonymous wrote:No way AI is way overhyped

This, its not at a level yet where it can replace people.

Anonymous wrote:No way AI is way overhyped

Did you mean this, or did you mean, “No way. AI is overhyped.”?

No way AI is way overhyped

The link says AI is going to result in 20,000 job losses per month in AI adjacent industries. That’s 240k across a year. The US civilian labor force in employment is 163,992,000 people.

The "automation will replace jobs" line has existed since the industrial revolution. It hasn't happened yet. Jobs will change, but history suggests that there is no reason to worry about mass unemployment.

UBI. Trump already opened that gate w the Trump accounts.

https://investinglive.com/centralbank/goldman-sachs-says-ai-is-coming-for-the-jobs-market-in-2026-20260205/

AI is moving faster than the big tech people thought, per Lisa Su on CNBC today.

Feels like a financial virus is coming. Obviously, the biliionaires will be ok, but what about the rest of us?