- CEO: why not both? - Shareholders: why not all three? - Hedge fund manager: hold my beer. - Humanity: yes, let’s replace all of the above. 100% unemployment rate is the only way to go. - Honestly 100% unemployed becuase we have a good universal income system or something would be great. But sadly it looks like we’re in a different timeline :( 
 
- *Several steps later* - Narrator: And that, folks, is how we got the Utopia we live in, by replacing all the work with AI, and letting people enjoy their lives - Haha. No. Nothing so hopeful. The rich people will get even richer and everyone that used to be working class and middle class die a slow death. - Now I wander what would happen if only rich people would survive and I’m sure somebody has already written an sf book about that - Like the planet solaria: https://fandom.adminforge.de/asimov/wiki/Solaria 
- Yeah. That’s (arguably) the background scenario to Asimov’s book “The Naked Sun” https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Naked_Sun - Edit: Ooh, Django already gave a cooler link to the same: https://discuss.tchncs.de/comment/10729278 
- Took me a while to track it down, but I think this is the book to which you were referring. - https://angryflower.com/348.html - I make no cleans about the stances of this artist; I just saw this strip years ago. - Robots sure are long overdue 
 
 
 
 
 
- Considering that C-suite executives are usually fantastically expensive, they’d be a logical position to automate (assuming AI worked like suits think it does). For some veeeery strange reason no board of directors has suggested replacing themselves with AIs - It’d be super easy to replace Sam Altman with a bot that spits out keywords known to increase OpenAI shares. - Waitaminute… Sam alt-man? - I know, right? It’s like he’s an incredibly shitty sci-fi villain. 
 
- deleted by creator - It’s almost like the rules don’t apply to the moneyed class 
 
 
 
- CEO is the first role to go! 
 
- given that LLMs and gen AIs are great at talking bullshit and creating presentations, one is a more realistic expectation than the other - I’ll believe AI can replace engineers when I see NVIDIA firing them. But like the graphic says, the manager’s job seems a lot easier to replace instead. 
 
- Managers might not like people but they don’t want to get rid of them. There’s no cheap thrill from micromanaging an AI. - 100,000% this - money or even utility seems to not be everything, compared to feeling self-importance 
- Plus it’s harder to pass the buck and blame an AI for your screw ups. It would be perceived, as the kids say, as a skills issue. 
- Is a CEO a manager? - Yes. In big established companies they are managing managers. - In smaller companies, no - In bigger company’s C levels manage VPs who manage directors who manage managers - It’s management alll the way down 
 
- Depends on the size of the company. 
 
 
- Owners: with AI we can finally get rid of everyone 
- If we fire all developers and allow AIs to program themselves, the AIs are going to commit virtual seppuku after a few days. - Can we build an AI manager that just keeps asking for different shades of red? 
- AIs are going to commit virtual seppuku after a few days. - Yes. And that’s our best case scenario. Worst case is a wildly incompetent, but still effective form of SkyNet. 
 
- It’s the marketing department that should really be worried. - Like the C level isn’t the marketing department 
- And to be fair, like always, good marketing is genius stuff. - But it also feels rare. I suspect precisely because C-suite and upper management love to mess with it, so the rote marketing approach gets normalized, which in turn drives all the decent marketing people away. 
 
- Only one of them gets to make the decision to fire the other 
- Could probably replace managers with AI, but being trained on most managers would mean it would be equally bad at its job. - I think the most likely is for the artists jobs to go away as art doesn’t have to be exact, but code does. 
- Maybe the central problem is racing to put other people out of work period, regardless of who they are. Maybe putting people out of work is not a net benefit for society, it’s actually negative in the long run, and only truly a benefit for shareholders. They don’t need any more of those at the expense of the working class. - Ideally, nobody should have to work. - The problem is that labor-saving technology is never permitted to save labor. We make those displaced laborers go do other shit. 
- It should be a net benefit for society. Any system in which it isn’t is a very flawed system. Like most of the world right now. 
 












