In their defense, they’re probably one of the only employees that actually can be replaced by ai.
Sounds like they could be fully replaced with AI. Not sure we’d lose much there
So they are basically even less productive
So even the little tiny bit of work they have to do to justify their obscene salaries is too much for them.
All the while pushing ridiculous RTO agendas.
While they WFM (work from mansion).
They need to be sitting in their plush offices at the top of buildings full of busy workers to keep up the pretense that they deserve their obscene pay. Sitting in a plush office at the top of an empty building just shines a spotlight on how useless they actually are.
I think we’re within 2-3 years of our first fully AI CEO.
As in, board of investors removes their last human CEO, and pays an AI company for an AI that does a job of the CEO at a fraction of a percentage of the cost.
And then one year after that is evidence than an AI CEO outperforms human CEO’s.
My understanding is the most “useful” thing a CEO typically does is schmooze with other rich assholes. A lot of companies need funding, and a lot of funding is handed out based on vibes. A good CEO makes friends with the assholes handing out money. That’s hard to replace with AI, probably.
On the other hand, CEOs routinely make stupid decisions. Maybe cutting that out makes up for the loss in funding opportunities?
Also this capitalist hellscape sucks. labor should unite instead of letting business idiots take most of the value they create.
That’s kinda my line of thinking - it’s all based on vibes, and AI actually has better vibes in the view of most people than your average CEO.
Yeah it’s not gonna schmooze in the traditional sense, but it will introduce itself as the smartest and most competent amalgamation of the best and most successful CEO’s in history, with none of the weaknesses or greed or vice of a human CEO.
I bet investors will jump on pretty quick for the first AI CEO, and more companies will follow after.
I have a fundamental question.
labor should unite instead of letting business idiots take most of the value they create.
In case you actually manage to do that, and the factories run in fact so well that a million workers are enough to provide the whole US with all the food and consumer articles they need.
Then what do the other 331 million USians do? They would not have a job and therefore no source of income. They would revolt and a civil war would erupt? How would you deal with that?
Basic income seems like an obvious solution.
Many people would pursue happy lives. Do some art. Do some gardening.
You’d also want to have like public housing or something so you don’t have parasitic landlords and homelessness.
Basic income seems like an obvious solution.
ok i agree to this.
But then i do wonder, why take the extra detour over “labor should unite instead of letting business idiots take most of the value they create” (which i read as seize the means of production)? Why not just introduce UBI immediately?
Cuz you can’t introduce Ubi as long as there is a parasitic capitalist class controlling all the wealth.
which is why we need a wealth tax.
Or drag them out of their houses and disembowel them but you know whatever works
There’s still going to be production, and I don’t think we should continue with the capitalist class extracting value and making bad decisions
If you introduce basic income without addressing that, you’ll still have all the enshittification
It’s unironically the one thing AI would probably be better at so far as I can tell.
This just feels straight up lazy and exploitative given their salaries.
Also, if this is normalized across your company, what the hell would meetings be? A group of avatars talking while humans do other stuff? “If the CEO can do it, why not us?”
If we’re at that point, let’s go ahead to UBI, because the smoke screen is falling about how BS this whole facade is.
I’ve been floating the idea a couple of times that UBI doesn’t need to be implemented “all at once”. For example, maybe a very test-version UBI could handout $100 to everyone. That’s not enough to live on, but it would provide a good support, especially to low-income households, as they relatively benefit more.
What are they so busy doing instead? Choking endangered animals to death? I’d prefer it if they just went to their meeting.
I think to them it’s more about proving the point that “even the most difficult work can be done by AI, so surely it’s ok to fire some employees and replace them by AI too”.
Is this how CEOs will escape giving away “tells” when they lie during these meetings?
