• 7101334@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      3 hours ago

      People who get paid exorbitant sums for doing exceptionally little probably try to avoid that concept

      • Ashenlux@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        12 minutes ago

        They are usually the ones setting up the too good to be true situations, so they probably never thought they would be on the receiving end of one.

  • rizzothesmall@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    30
    ·
    6 hours ago

    I replaced all my software team with agents which can work 24h a day on the product and now none of the software works and I’m out $600000 waaaaaa

    • Exec
  • Gsus4@mander.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    7 hours ago

    This has been the case ever since things that seem great, like google cloud computing…and your little project just bankrupted you because you left a tap open over the weekend.

  • bthest@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    edit-2
    9 hours ago

    Here’s a real a cost saving prompt:

    “Translate the contents of every single document in our databases into as many languages (including dead and constructed fictional languages) as possible.”

    Now you can fire the one Hispanic guy you hired because you assumed he could speak Hindi.

  • adhdsergio@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    10 hours ago

    It’s funny because they do this to other people; they just never thought it’d happen to them. FAFO 🫡

  • trackball_fetish@lemmy.wtf
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    12 hours ago

    Anyone who fell for this grift deserves it and much worse.

    People, usually who have never done the job, still love to argue that it can compete with software devs and infra engineers.

    The sad part they don’t see (or maybe care about) is while it can’t currently (and absolutely not llms) they’re pushing a narrative that we should automate everyone and everything which is dangerous and moronic.

    • jj4211@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 hours ago

      The people who have never done the work love more than anyone else to talk about how the work should be done better and cheaper.

      Broadly this sentiment stands for most professions.

    • Shanmugha@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      11 hours ago

      Well, we should automate everything that can be automated - for the benefit of everyone. Last part is something not seen on worldwide scale ever, just yet

      • trackball_fetish@lemmy.wtf
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        11 hours ago

        I understand the argument for automation being used where appropriate to benefit us and allow us the freedom to focus on other things, however, I’m skeptical due to the social behavior already occurring from the powers that be expressing the desire to enslave us, if not just kill us, using the mere concept of AI as justification.

        And funny enough, pushing this hard will only leave a bad taste regarding any mention of artificial intelligence or automation. Whereas if these people just fucked off they might have been able to sell whatever usefulness it has in the correct places.

        • ricecake@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          6 hours ago

          It happens every couple of decades with AI. Since it’s a broader field than most people think, we have a pretty long cycle of a new development looking exciting, people getting way too excited and optimistic, the development being exactly what it was promised to be, and then people getting disappointed and avoiding anything with the AI label. Then we decide that because we’re used to this new thing, it can be used in stuff as was originally appropriate but it no longer qualifies as AI, because “that’s not AI, it’s just ___”.

    • LittleBorat3@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      6 hours ago

      Many people I know spend the equivalent of 500 usd a day in tokens if these were priced correctly. Wishing employers good luck once these tokens need to actually make a profit for the AI companies.

  • fodor@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    16 hours ago

    This reporting is basically dishonest. The execs are not confused. They knew this was likely to occur, because we all told them so.

    Now, you can argue that they hoped otherwise, that they were being ridiculously optimistic. But to argue that they didn’t expect it is simply unbelievable.

    • jj4211@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      2 hours ago

      In my experience if there’s one thing that executives excel at, it is not managing to hear people saying something inconvenient to their world view.

    • Aceticon@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      10 hours ago

      The modern executive who got their post from being mates with the right people, having attended the right schools and relentless self-promotion isn’t a highly analitical person who sistematically and in depth researches their options before chosing what to do.

      This is unsurprising given that a system were the image one projects is critical to one’s career progression rewards almost the opposite: they’re supposed to look decisive and confident.

      The myth of CxO competence is just that: a myth and the product of confusing the characteristics of the character they’re playing with the characteristics of the actor, something we’re definitelly egged on to do by the Media.

      It’s only unbelievable that the execs did not expect this for those who believe the execs are actually competent at management rather than being people born in the right families and whose greatest competence is in playing the right role for the right audience.

    • floquant@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      12 hours ago

      The KPMG report, initially flagged by the Register, surveyed 2,145 senior execs across 20 countries, finding that an astonishing 29 percent of them had no idea where the growing costs associated with AI were coming from.

      They’re just dumb assholes

      • ITGuyLevi@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        8 hours ago

        Dumb assholes that don’t read the reports or pay attention in meetings where this is cost is brought up.

    • BCsven@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      16 hours ago

      Well it was cheaper before, till Ai vendors increased prices to cover the real costs