| ▲ | honeycrispy 4 hours ago |
| Anthropic's CEO Dario has annoyed me to no end with his "AI will take all the jobs in 6 months" doomer speeches on every podcast he graces his presence with. |
|
| ▲ | keeda 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| I think he's right and we should be thinking about this a lot more. Even the IMF is worried about 40 - 60% of global employment: https://www.imf.org/en/blogs/articles/2024/01/14/ai-will-tra... Focusing on Dario, his exact quote IIRC was "50% of all white collar jobs in 5 years" which is still a ways off, but to check his track record, his prediction on coding was only off by a month or so. If you revisit what he actually said, he didn't really say AI will replace 90% of all coders, as people widely report, he said it will be able to write 90% of all code. And dhese days it's pretty accurate. 90% of all code, the "dark matter" of coding, is stuff like boilerplate and internal LoB CRUD apps and typical data-wrangling algorithms that Claude and Codex can one-shot all day long. Actually replacing all those jobs however will take time. Not just to figure out adoption (e.g. AI coding workflows are very different from normal coding workflows and we're just figuring those out now), but to get the requisite compute. All AI capacity is already heavily constrained, and replacing that many jobs will require compute that won't exist for years and he, as someone scrounging for compute capacity, knows that very well. But that just puts an upper limit on how long we have to figure out what to do with all those white collar professionals. We need to be thinking about it now. |
| |
| ▲ | honeycrispy 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | He's not right though. He's trying to scare the market into his pocket. It's well established that AI just turns devs into AI babysitters that are 10% more productive and produce 200% the bugs, and in the long-term don't understand what they built. | | |
| ▲ | keeda an hour ago | parent [-] | | > It's well established that AI just turns devs into AI babysitters that are 10% more productive and produce 200% the bugs, and in the long-term don't understand what they built. It's not well established at all. In fact, there is increasing evidence to the contrary if you look outside the HN echo chamber. The nuanced take is that AI in coding is an amplifier of your engineering culture: teams with strong software discipline (code reviews, tests, docs, CI/CD, etc.) enjoy more velocity and fewer outages, teams with weak discipline suffer more outages. There are at least two large-scale industry reports showing this trend -- DORA 2025 and the latest DX report -- not to mention the infinite anecdotes on this very forum. > He's trying to scare the market into his pocket. People say this, but I don't get it. Is portraying yourself as a destroyer of the economy considered good marketing? Maybe there was a case to be made for convincing the government to impose regulations on the industry, but as we're seeing and they're experiencing first hand, the problem is the government. | | |
| ▲ | shimman an hour ago | parent [-] | | If these tools were so great they wouldn't be struggling so hard to sell them. Great sign that the company has to mandate a "productivity" tool that the workers hate. Hence why all these LLM companies love government contracts, they can't sell to consumers so they'll just steal from tax payers instead. |
|
| |
| ▲ | overgard 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | > Focusing on Dario, his exact quote IIRC was "50% of all white collar jobs in 5 years" which is still a ways off, but to check his track record, his prediction on coding was only off by a month or so. If you revisit what he actually said, he didn't really say AI will replace 90% of all coders, as people widely report, he said it will be able to write 90% of all code. Ugh, people here seem to think that all software is react webapps. There are so many technologies and languages this stuff is not very good at. Web apps are basically low hanging fruit. Dario hasn't predicted anything, and he does not have anyone's interests other than his own in mind when he makes his doomer statements. | | |
| ▲ | ilumanty 37 minutes ago | parent | next [-] | | Claude keeps getting SQLite's weird GROUP BY with MIN/MAX behavior completely wrong. Generally, complex SQL is not its strong side. | |
| ▲ | keeda 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | The problem is, the low hanging fruit, the stuff it's good at, is 90% of all software. Maybe more. And it's getting better at the other 10% too. Two years ago ChatGPT struggled to help me with race conditions in a C++ LD_PRELOAD library. It was a side project so I dropped it. Last week Codex churned away for 10 minutes and gave me a working version with tests. |
| |
| ▲ | bdangubic 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | > 90% of all code, the "dark matter" of coding, is stuff like boilerplate and internal LoB CRUD apps and typical data-wrangling algorithms that Claude and Codex can one-shot all day long. most of us are getting paid for the other 10% | | |
| ▲ | keeda 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | If you mean "us" on this forum, I would believe that. I would bet the number of engineers working on stuff "outside the distribution" is overrepresented here. If you mean "us" as in all software engineers, not at all. The challenge we're facing is exactly that, reskilling the 90% of engineers who have been working on CRUD apps to the 10% that is outside the distribution. | | |
| ▲ | bdangubic an hour ago | parent [-] | | > 90% of engineers who have been working on CRUD apps I am a 30-year "veteran" in the industry and in my opinion this cannot be further from the truth but it is often quotes (even before AI). CRUD apps have been a solved problem for quite some time now and while there are still companies who may allow someone to "coast" doing CRUD stuff they are hard to find these days. There is almost always more to it than building dumb stuff. I have also seen (more and more each year) these types of jobs being off-shored to teams for pennies on a dollar. What I have experienced a lot is teams where there are what I call "innovators" and "closers." "Innovators" do the hard work, figure shit out, architect, design... and then once that is done you give it to "closers" to crank things out. With LLMs now the part of "closers" could be "replaced" but in my experience there is always some part, whether it is 5% or 10% that is difficult to "automate" so-to-speak |
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | sneilan1 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| I don't understand why some of these AI companies check their egos at the door and hire public relations companies. Yes, I understand they are changing the world but customers do not open their wallets when they are scared. Very few people I know are as avant-guarde as I am with AI, but, most people look at these new technologies and simply feel fear. Why pay for something that will replace you? |
| |
| ▲ | honeycrispy 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | He knows what he's doing. It's to drive FOMO for investors. He needs tens of billions of capital and is trying to scare them into not looking at his balance sheet before investing. It's reckless, and is soaking up capital that could have gone towards more legitimate investments. | | |
| ▲ | sneilan1 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | Yes, this is probably the piece I am not realizing. However, there is no better approach to getting more capital than by scaring people? |
|
|
|
| ▲ | logravia 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| It certainly is. For people who have not heard the statements, here are some quotes. I bring them up, because I think it's worthwhile to remember the bold predictions that are made now and how they will pan out in the future. Council on Foreign Relations, 11 months ago: "In 12 months, we may be in a world where AI is essentially writing all of the code." Axios interview, 8 months ago: "[...] AI could soon eliminate 50% of entry-level office jobs." The Adolescence of Technology (essay), 1 month ago: "If the exponential continues—which is not certain, but now has a decade-long track record supporting it—then it cannot possibly be more than a few years before AI is better than humans at essentially everything." |
|
| ▲ | pier25 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Also "AGI is just around the corner". |
|
| ▲ | agoodusername63 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| It makes me wonder why he has the job of CEO then if he's so confident that the technology will destroy the world. Don't worry, I know exactly why. $ |
|
| ▲ | upmind 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| +1, he also has this viewpoint that no other lab will be able to "contain" AI and has a general doomer outlook on AI which I don't appreciate. |
| |
| ▲ | saalweachter 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | To be fair, it's hilarious how much verbiage was spent discussing AI 'getting out of the box', when the first thing everyone did with LLMs was immediately throw away the box and go "Here! Have the internet! Here! Have root access! Want a robot body? I'll get you a robot body." |
|
|
| ▲ | lbhdc 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| What I find so funny about heads of AI companies coming out saying things like this, is their own career pages suggest they don't actually feel that way. https://www.anthropic.com/careers/jobs |
|
| ▲ | 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| [deleted] |
|
| ▲ | mgraczyk 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| When did he say this? |
|
| ▲ | moomoo11 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| He’s an e/acc guy. That should tell you everything. And maybe the incredibly awkward behavior and demeanor. |
| |
| ▲ | slfnflctd 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | "Y'know, like, the thing is, like, y'know, here's the thing..." I totally feel for people with speech pathologies or anxiety that makes it harder for them to communicate verbally, but how is this guy the public face of the company and doing all these interviews by himself? With as much as is at stake, I find it baffling. |
|
|
| ▲ | jobs_throwaway 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| He's annoyed me most with the way he speaks. I'm not sure if its a tick or what but the way he'll repeat a word 10x before starting a sentence is painful to listen to. |
| |
| ▲ | sneilan1 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | Yes, the CEO's of these AI companies are clearly not the people who should be selling AI products. They need to be hidden away and kept behind closed doors where they can do their best work. And they need advertising companies, PR firms and better marketing tactics to try and soothe the customers. |
|