| ▲ | porknubbins 30 minutes ago | |
My employers who are introducing AI are not laughing evil supervillains hoovering up all the excess profits, they are normal people who wanted long careers and are as nervous as anyone about competition amd what AI will do to organizations if people become truly redundant. | ||
| ▲ | hilariously 22 minutes ago | parent | next [-] | |
Cool well my employers fired me for an AI psychosis trip so I am glad you are working for those ones who "wanted long careers" and "are nervous as anyone" because hoboy is that not what we are seeing in the ownership class right now. | ||
| ▲ | macintux 15 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] | |
How many of those employers are living paycheck to paycheck, struggling to feed their kids? I have less sympathy for decision-makers who are stressed than the people who’ll be fired first, and have less mobility. Or safety net. | ||
| ▲ | musicale 9 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] | |
> My employers who are introducing AI are not laughing evil supervillains hoovering up all the excess profits I care less about the motivation rather than the action. | ||
| ▲ | komali2 14 minutes ago | parent | prev [-] | |
Right, exactly, there's no good guys under capitalism, that's why you need industry wide labor unions moreso than within a single company. You could have a straight up communist for a boss that completely shares all profits, but if the business doesn't extract labor value and expand as aggressively as other businesses do, it'll eventually get eaten or lawfared to death, or priced out, or closed out of deals (e.g. small player in chips related business). So the only way to prevent industry wide redundancy at everywhere except the 1% largest companies that survive (which will also be laying off people but not completely closing down), is through organized labor. Or, I suppose, completely restructuring the economic system, which I'm very down to chat about as well, but the labor organizing feels more achievable for now. | ||