Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

But then you’d expect the trend to self correct in the long run. AI actually does seem to replacing customer-service and CS jobs effectively.
 help



From what I've seen many efforts to replace roles such as customer service with AI are being rolled back or downscaled due to intolerably high error rates and general incapability. While these segments won't come out unscathed I don't think the actual impact will end up being as severe as feared.

I believe that too. Broadly, I’m agreeing with the parent comment—AI can’t be causing long-run layoffs and be worthless.

You're apparently assuming that AI related layoffs are rational, based on those making the decisions having good information about what their own organizations are achieving with AI.

I think this is far from the truth. In many companies AI has become a religion, not a new technology to be evaluated and judged. Employees are told to use AI, and report how much they are using, and all understand the consequences of giving the wrong answer. The CEO hears the tales of rampant AI use and productivity that he is demanding to hear, then pats himself on the back and initiates another layoff. Meanwhile in the trenches little if anything has actually changed.


> assuming that AI related layoffs are rational

Nope. I’m saying if firms lay off on the assumption of AI gains that never come, they’ll be beaten by firms who don’t.


OK, but your post reads as if you think that AI being the cause of layoffs can't be true if AI is "worthless" (less capable than they are assuming), which is false.

CEOs are laying off because of AI because they think it will save them money, but are doing so based on misinformation, largely due their own insistence that everyone uses AI, and report how much they are using - they are just hearing what they asked to hear (just like Mao hearing about impossible levels of rice production during the "Great Leap Forward"). I'm not making this up - I've seen it first hand.

You can see the proof of this - companies laying of because of what they mistakenly believe AI can do - in companies like Salesforce, forced to do an embarassing U-turn and hire people back when the reality sets in. At least Salesforce were quick to correct - most big companies are not so nimble or ready to admit their own mistakes.

We seem to have reached mania-like levels of rice-production reporting, with companies like Meta now taking AI token usage as a proxy for productivity and/or a measure of something positive, and apparently having a huge leaderboard displaying who is using the most (i.e. spending the most money!). The only guaranteed outcome of this is that they will indeed see massive use of tokens, and a massive AI bill, and then in a year or so will likely be left scratching their heads wondering why nothing much appears to have changed.


> your post reads as if you think that AI being the cause of layoffs can't be true

Sorry, I was unclear. Those statements can’t both be true in the long run. They can absolutely be true in the short run.


Might be true, but unfortunately, we need to pay for rent/mortgage/groceries in the short run.



Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: