157
I'm God's most powerful anti-AI hater and have the capacity for morality so this ain't it folks
If AI is so fucking transformative why do we need to be compelled to use it
Hey are we even breaking even? Like all the devs I talk to about it go "yeah it's ok but you spend about as much time fixing what it gives you as you would writing it yourself". Can you imagine the business acumen it takes to have your devs take as much time as usual but also pay OpenAI a royalty for use of their text extrusion machine? And having it assist the HR department? Legal? All it's good for is finding a polite way to tell someone they're fired or communicate absolutely nothing behind sixty layers of corporate executive jargon.
We had something similar where I work (although less invasive than this wild shit), and it got me thinking.
For jobs that don't have a clear ceiling, or a clear list of contained tasks, it's hard to measure output, and it's hard to know if you've successfully replaced a person with automation. For instance, how well is the marketing department doing.
The bosses have heard so much about AI, they want that perceived competitive advantage. But they can't really simply eliminate these jobs. So what they're looking for is AI-powered employees because they believe that will maximize their output.
Most employees can't actually get anything good out of AI, especially if they're competent at other technologies like excel, but the boss WILL not hear that. They will only hear that some of their employees are unwilling or unable to harness the competitive potential of AI. That suddenly means that every employee has a strong incentive to present their labor as AI-enhanced. To exaggerate how much it helps them. To make the boss think they've at least reached parity with their competition.
AI productivity has become a self-reinforcing myth in nearly our whole society.