The rich get richer and the poor get more AI edited and toned condolence posting.

ActionHank 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

That close out is brutal, "to our teammates who are leaving".

Real "Oh no! So sorry to see you go totally by your own choice" vibes.

The business is "solid", but is it not profitable? Who is cashing in on cutting these jobs? Which exec is losing their job for overhiring?

	▲	ToucanLoucan 3 hours ago \| parent [-]
		And why not fire that exec who doubtlessly costs the company far more money while adding substantially less value than any of these employees? If a company is genuinely losing money and needs to boost it's profitability surely the easiest place to cut costs is the top where the lowest ROI positions are. Always goes back to that story from Nintendo when the Wii U went pear-shaped on release, Satoru Iwata and many other executives all took substantial pay cuts to keep the company healthy without demolishing their own ranks. Be nice to see an American company do that just one time, as a treat.

▲

pgwhalen 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

As someone not good at identifying this myself, what about this post indicates AI editing?

	▲	powerpcmac 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		In the year of our Lord 2026 when you can be fired for not churning enough tokens, you can believe any corpo-post corpo speak has been checked by their LLMs for "compassionate voicing" and "low risk wording"

▲

ryandvm an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

I still don't understand the economics of the full AI rollout.

Who the hell is buying anything if more than 50% of the workforce is unemployed? And among the post-AI employable, every job that isn't highly skilled is going to have the wages pushed to the floor due to rampant unemployment.

None of this shit works unless we figure out "Star Trek welfare"...

	▲	vanuatu an hour ago \| parent [-]
		in the short term, ai has been job-creating and unemployment remains quite low. The technology has mostly been augmentative (like every other technological revolution beforehand) if (big if) the technology continues to improve at the current rapid pace, then we would need to organize welfare for the bottom % of population that cannot compete with ai or robotics in any feasible way, but that kind of presupposes insane productivity growth such that living off 'welfare' is a life of luxury compared to the average life right now