• gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    128
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    Short term yes; long term probably not. All the dipshit c-suites pushing the “AI” worker replacement initiatives are going to destroy their workforces and then realize that LLMs can’t actually reliably replace any of the workers they fired. And I love that for management.

    • foggy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      54
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      2 months ago

      They’re gonna realize the two jobs it can actually replace is HR and the C suite.

        • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          2 months ago

          Yeah, HR gets by because of legal compliance, and execs get by through convincing the board to give them X years, and then jump to the next one.

      • AdamEatsAss@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        18
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        2 months ago

        Lol AI cannot replace either of those jobs. “I’m sorry I can’t help with your time off request but here is a gluten free recipe for a pie that feeds 30 people.”

        • Venat0r@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          10
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          It won’t replace any jobs entirely, it will just reduce the number of people needed for each job.

          Not that there’s much difference if you’re the one being made redundant.

    • 3volver@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      You’re referring to something that is changing and getting better constantly. In the long term LLMs are going to be even better than they are now. It’s ridiculous to think that it won’t be able to replace any of the workers that were fired. LLMs are going to allow 1 person to do the job of multiple people. Will it replace all people? No. But even if it allows 1 person to do the job of 2 people, that’s 50% of the workforce unemployed. This isn’t even mentioning how good robotics have gotten over the past 10 years.

      • JeffKerman1999@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        2 months ago

        You must have one person constantly checking for hallucinations in everything that is generated: how is that going to be faster?

    • fidodo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      It can potentially allow 1 worker to do the job of 10. For 9 of those workers, they have been replaced. I don’t think they will care that much for the nuance that they technically weren’t replaced by AI, but by 1 co-worker who is using AI to be more efficient.

      That doesn’t necessarily mean that we won’t have enough jobs any more, because when in human history have we ever become more efficient and said “ok, good enough, let’s just coast now”? We will just increase the ambition and scope of what we will build, which will require more workers working more efficiently.

      But that still really sucks because it’s not going to be the same exact jobs and it will require re-training. These disruptions are becoming more frequent in human history and it is exhausting.

      We still need to spread these gains so we can all do less and also help those whose lives have been disrupted. Unfortunately that doesn’t come for free. When workers got the 40 hour work week it was taken by force.

      • AProfessional@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        My colleagues are starting to use AI, it just makes their code worse and harder to review. I honestly can’t imagine that changing, AI doesn’t actually understand anything.

        • Yggnar@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          This comment has similar vibes to a boomer in the 80s saying that the Internet is useless and full of nothing but nerds arguing on forums, and he doesn’t see that changing.

    • MxM111@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      2 months ago

      That’s not what is going to happen. Copilot will simply increase productivity over, and where before they needed 10 people, gradually, through attrition they will need only 9, then 8, and so on. That does not mean higher unemployment though, it means more product.

      • just another dev@lemmy.my-box.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        2 months ago
        • “AI means there will be fewer people required to do the same amount of work”

        • “this does not mean higher unemployment”

        I think you left out a steep off reasoning there. At least, I don’t follow.

      • slaacaa@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        Businesses want to grow, not keep stable. They might fire a few ppl in the short term, but in the long term it’s more likely the group of 10 would just do now the work of a 12-13 group with AI, producing hugher outputs for the same money they were getting before, meaning extra profit for the shareholders.

  • Hobbes_Dent@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    50
    ·
    2 months ago

    Microsoft argues that its AI automation will remove the boring bits of jobs instead of replacing jobs entirely.

    Simple question: does the Microsoft HR department agree?

  • Fake4000@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    25
    ·
    2 months ago

    No. But expect to do more work for the same pay since things are slightly easier now with AI.

  • AutoTL;DR@lemmings.worldB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 months ago

    This is the best summary I could come up with:


    Microsoft will soon allow businesses and developers to build AI-powered Copilots that can work like virtual employees and perform tasks automatically.

    Instead of Copilot sitting idle waiting for queries, it will be able to do things like monitor email inboxes and automate a series of tasks or data entry that employees normally have to do manually.

    It’s a big change in the behavior of Copilot in what the industry commonly calls AI agents, or the ability for chatbots to intelligently perform complex tasks autonomously.

    Microsoft’s argument that it only wants to reduce the boring bits of your job sounds idealistic for now, but with the constant fight for AI dominance between tech companies, it feels like we’re increasingly on the verge of more than basic automation.

    You can build Microsoft’s Copilot agents with the ability to flag certain scenarios for humans to review, which will be useful for more complex queries and data.

    We constantly see AI fail on basic text prompts, provide incorrect answers to queries, or add extra fingers to images, so do businesses and consumers really trust it enough to automate tasks in the background?


    The original article contains 842 words, the summary contains 188 words. Saved 78%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!

  • aesthelete@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    2 months ago

    Meanwhile, I’m at my job trying to get an instance of a machine that can automatically SFTP somewhere as part of a script like it’s 1998 and I need a shell account from my dialup connection.