Soon enough the clankers will automate that part too. I'm eager to see how "liberated" those people are going to feel then.

▲

barbazoo 6 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Totally, I can't quite imagine an AI automating my use of AI tough, how it would infer what prompt I would use at any given time, the problem space is infinite. Am I adding another *arr app to my stack, are we building a SPA, a home automation plugin, whatever. These are things that I want to do and AI helps with that.

In the corporate setting I think though it won't take a lot of time to reduce the layers and number of people that are required to run a software company. Either one becomes a more general work manager or obsolete I guess.

▲

6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

[deleted]

▲

bayarearefugee 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

It is remarkable to me how few people seem to understand it is a much smaller step for AI-generated software to kill the need for companies of idea men than it was for them to kill the need for people writing code.

All of your potential customers are just going to vibecode their own software. In many cases they won't even realize that the software they vibecoded even exists as it will just be an invisible tool the LLM built for itself to reproduce a similar solution to a similar prompt over and over.

Once AI flattens out any company enough, the company itself no longer needs to exist, it can trivially be replaced by the model providers. Companies exist to be collections of skilled people with a common goal. When you don't need that, you don't need companies. The agents can work for your customer instead of you and nothing changes except who gets paid (not you).

There's a ton of magical thinking out there where people seem to assume AI will progress right up to the point where it is maximally beneficial to their job without replacing them. Keep huffing that copium, folks.

▲

Animats 5 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> There's a ton of magical thinking out there where people seem to assume AI will progress right up to the point where it is maximally beneficial to their job without replacing them.

I've commented previously that there will be much more political interest in AI causing unemployment when the first CEOs are replaced.

That's going to happen. It's part of the "creative destruction" of capitalism. If AIs maximize shareholder value better than some CEOs, those CEOs are toast. They either get replaced in the same organization, or a new company arises and crushes them.

	▲	jacquesm 4 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		CEO will just be 'human scapegoat' to catch flak when the AI messes up. You'll get a nice comp as long as it doesn't.
	▲	infamouscow 2 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		I don't think that's ever going to happen when models still hallucinate and prompt-refuse, especially since one of the two SOTA model makers insists on aligning their models toward a progressive ideology. Just imagine what would happen if JP Morgan did this and the model decided it needs to dump their position in AI data centers. Or maybe it's a health insurance company that fires all of the claim deniers for being unaligned with Dario's ethics.

▲

aerhardt 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

> There's a ton of magical thinking out there where people seem to assume AI will progress right up to the point where it is maximally beneficial to their job without replacing them. Keep huffing that copium, folks.

Because you are singularly right about the issue? Have some intellectual modesty, brother.

	▲	ahartmetz 4 hours ago \| parent [-]
		I think it's fair to expect tha AI capabilities will more likely end up far over or under that magic threshold than close to it. Given the way that technology develops, it's probably going to be over.