they're typically sociopaths, narcissists, or both. other people hardly exist
post
Lots of people are saying that AI isn't that good, and that's absolutely true.
To your question though, AI has been doing better at running companies than CEOs.
Who would've thought that the machine that's great at making shit up and running with it would be good at the "job" of people that make shit up and run with it.
While AI is not good, people seem to have forgotten the fact that CEOs are also not good...and are complete idiots.
replies:
The Master’s Tools Will Never Dismantle the Master’s House.
replies:
I think you already know the answer because you asked the question.
The CEOs are the ones trying to convince everyone (investors really) that AI can replace humans to try to increase profits. That's it.
LLMs/AI are fantastic tools, but that's all they are. Just tools. The CEOs are selling the AI revolution fantasy.
replies:
Same reason religions demand you tithe but refuse to pay taxes, even though they don’t deny Christ said, “render unto Caesar what is Caesar’s, and render unto God what is God’s,” which is to say, fulfil your obligations to the government before fulfilling your obligations to God.
replies:
When somebody insists that the food they made is good and that you should have some but refuses to eat it themselves, you know that they're lying and the food is shit.
replies:
If AI was anywhere close to that good, they wouldn't be encouraging the masses to use it, they would be hoarding access for their own benefit.
Because it’s not that good.
AI is an excuse. AI is an excuse to: reduce staff, hoard resources, sustain dependency on a rental economy, stifle creatives (who might have subversive messages!), surveil the world quickly by summarizing huge amounts of cloud stored files, create false evidence, cast doubt on real evidence, fleece investors, and finally, convince everyone you’re “the NEXT Bill Gates/tech messiah”
Why couldn’t these fuckers just sink their money into fusion instead? We need that way more badly.
replies:
Because the CEOs are the ones making the decisions
It's not that good.
Much of a CEO's role is schmoozing with other rich assholes. AI can't do that. Maybe once it can buy hookers and blow.
replies:
Because you can't scapegoat an AI when the business does something illegal.
They will
AI can't roll around in a pool full of money.
replies:
because it's not about how well a job can be done, it's about running the fucking show.
One of the weird things about ceos, in USA at least, is that one of their roles is to be the fall guy for the board if things go badly. If they screw up badly enough, it's expected that they'll find it hard to be hired as CEO elsewhere, which they use to justify outsize compensation plans. I'm not sure AI would fulfill that role, nor the schmoozing aspects
replies:
That's not really how it's working out. What we'll see more of are companies that are created using AI, where the people are basically working absolutely essential positions, while the AI handles most of the "executive" functions. The simple idea of AI coming in and "replacing" the CEO isn't how it's happening.
AI models are not stupid to mess with such powerful people. They are together
replies:
Oh. Their job is harder to replace than some paltry programmer, who just copies code from SO anyway.
replies:
all 46 comments