- cross-posted to:
- workreform@lemmy.world
- cross-posted to:
- workreform@lemmy.world
You must log in or register to comment.
To simplify that, managers usually don’t admit errors and of course they don’t admit mistakes. The environment in which a manager works makes this absolutely impossible for them.
And every “magical blackbox innovation like something from Civilization games, finally reached” compels managers to try to do what they shouldn’t.
It’s them seeing a thing that is good for those who follow it and bad for those who don’t, and they are trying to do something to not miss the train, not realizing that such things don’t happen through managers, they spread through professionals. If an “innovation” doesn’t spread through professionals, it’s not that. It’s like grassgroots politics versus being told who’s the savior of the nation.
A manager wouldn’t accept what I wrote, they’d talk about professionals stuck in old rigid ways of thinking and all other loads of crap, because they are not qualified to say what’s old and new and what’s promising and what’s not, and those “stuck” professionals are.
This would be a perfectly fine new kind of services and applications if only not for managerial hype train. With people themselves starting to use tools how and when they themselves need. On a case-to-case basis.
That’s the problem, managers are people who manage timetables, tasks, negotiations and finances. Managers are in principle not the kind of people who can think about “innovations” and “revolutions”. They are just not qualified for that, like a janitor is not qualified to fix wiring.
They can be, but their main activity has nothing to do with even understanding such things.
Kara had experienced increasing burnout, much of which she attributes to being instructed to use AI despite her concerns over legality and creative use. She said her team was encouraged to use AI-enabled production tools like Runway, which generates AI videos and images, and ElevenLabs, an AI voice generator, to supplement its creative work. As the producer, she was charged with handling legal clearance at a time when AI-generated video and audio based on a human’s likeness is still a gray area.
Her employer “compelled” the team to incorporate generative AI, then “in the same conversation, warned about the legal dangers”, she said. The result was constant stress.
This is a pattern that I see a lot in tech. None of the managers is taking responsibility. They create double-binds all the time - stuff has to be on time, but with high quality, has to done rapidly, but safe, one has to save work but the product should be secure, and so on. This is not psychologically healthy.
In the last year I’ve seen my management go from “you have unlimited AI caps, use it as much as possible” to “actually now you have a very low cap, please use it when you feel like it’s necessary”. The real disruption has been to productivity, ironically enough, because the rules of my job keep changing.
This however is not a new thing. It’s always been this way.
Of course they would expect all that. After all they have listened to tech bro CEOs for years now that AI will solve all of this.
Who tf quits their job voluntarily in this economy? And then in a shithole country like the US at that, where social security safety nets basically don’t exist
An unemployed programmer here who quit their job 6 months ago. Also have a baby on the way.
To answer your question - people who are totally burnt out. Some of us have been in the trenches for a long time and when you start to spiral, the world gets pretty dark. I’m not rich, I was just broken.
people who built up millions as a tech worker,they can afford it, in the last 10 years if you been working you would likely have that much by now. if you are just starting maybe not, or a newborn on the way. alot of them are holding onto theier jobs for dear life though.
in the last 10 years if you been working you would likely have that much by now
This might be more likely for big tech workers, but it’s less realistic the further you get from the Silicon Valley archetype. Saving millions over 10 years would mean averaging $200k+ per year after taxes and expenses, which I can’t imagine will happen in my career unless I start a successful business or get lucky gambling on stocks.
people that can afford to
Yep, title should be “wealthy white colar workers who made bank on tech now refusing to learn new tech and indulging in their hobbies”. Okay… maybe an AI could have written it better, but I know I suck at writing anything concise.
While there’s no evidence linking AI to mass layoff
the last 3 years of layoffs due to ai says otherwise.
Well where I work is currently on a hiring freeze reportedly because of AI, but I just found that a bit suspicious because we’ve been on a freeze for three years I’m sure that AI of 3 years ago wasn’t good enough to justify the hiring freeze. It can’t have anything to do with the fact that we keep losing major clients to our competitors due to corporate mismanagement. No it’s definitely AI that’s the problem.
Plenty of those layoffs used “AI” as a cover for the real reason. It looks better for the management board saying they are firing people because of increased efficiency (even if it’s imaginary) than to say they overreached and underdelivered, and now the company has too many employees for what it can achieve.
You can sell expensive non-physical non-essential items of fashion positioning them as something everyone needs for only so long.
I mean, it’s also even a bit of AI, but mostly that IT as important and in demand as it was is not compatible with being divided between a few gigantic monopolists with no good will whatsoever.
Less meaningful social activity happens in that suppressed environment, meaning less business.
And what happens, is being optimized, yes, because when thousands of well-paid developers are doing roughly the same things again and again, that can be optimized.
easy to hire easy to fire
Well actually no. Outside of the US you can’t just fire people, you have to find some sort of justification and AI provides one that no one can really question.
AI is a technology that does exist, and it definitely is causing some disruption, while there is a question mark over how much disruption is really attributed to AI efficiency gains, you cannot demonstrably prove that any particular redundancy wasn’t because of AI. So it would be very difficult to win a case of unfair dismissal.
Just twiddling my thumbs waiting on severance. These motherfuckers will have to pay me to fuck off.
These aren’t the people who “need” the money. One example ran a large marketing department, the other probably got paid half a mil a year in base pay.
And to think, I’d be happy with a company car.
Would you though. It would probably come with a camera that watches you all the time and tracking… and ads. Lol
Yeah…
How many? “Journalists” should be held liable for using this shit ambiguous language to push propaganda.
