The problem with using unemployment as a metric is hiring is driving by perception. You're making an educated guess as to how many people you need in the future.

Anthropic can cause layoffs through pure marketing. People were crediting an Anthropic statement in causing a drop in IBM's stock value, which may genuinely lead to layoffs: https://finance.yahoo.com/news/ibm-stock-plunges-ai-threat-1...

We'll probably have to wait for the hype to wear off to get a better idea, but that might take a long while.

▲

pixl97 18 hours ago | parent [-]

Between 2004 and 2008 I did many things in computing as a company that offered my services, one of these was information gathering automation. It almost never immediately lead to decreases in employment. The systems had a to be in place for a while, people had to get used to them, people had to stop making common mistakes with them.

Then the 2008 crash happened and those people were gone in a blink of an eye and never replaced. The companies grew in staff after that, but it was in things like sales and marketing.

▲

nitwit005 17 hours ago | parent [-]

I'm afraid I can't find the connection between this and what I wrote.

	▲	pixl97 5 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Layoffs are very rarely directly correlated with a new technology coming into place. As much as businesses say they are forward looking and looking to increase profits, they'll commonly remain conservative until they are forced by external conditions, say a recession. This is, if AI is going to cause job losses it will feel very small for some time, then it will happen suddenly all at once with little to no time to properly react.