Amazon boss tells staff AI means their jobs are at risk in coming years
Technology
71
Beiträge
52
Kommentatoren
242
Aufrufe
-
Something I think should be on the same level as "if buying isn't owning piracy isn't theft" is something like "if an ai/robot can take my job why should I have to work"
why should I have to work
Because landlords would like to keep their wealth extraction going.
In theory we could get solar panels and batteries for power, some cheap robots for growing food, but all land is owned.
-
why should I have to work
Because landlords would like to keep their wealth extraction going.
In theory we could get solar panels and batteries for power, some cheap robots for growing food, but all land is owned.
On how about "the robot can take my job I only want the money"
-
As we roll out more generative AI and agents, it should change the way our work is done
we expect that this will reduce our total corporate workforce
Are we done for?
Amazon boss tells staff AI means their jobs are at risk in coming years
Andrew Jassy tells white collar workers that such technology means fewer people will be needed for some jobs
the Guardian (www.theguardian.com)
Did someone tell Amazon that some of the staff they will let go will have access to AI as well and will turn around and start competing with them? Someone should as AI is not just for corporations. In fact it is and may continue to benefit individuals and small teams more.
-
As we roll out more generative AI and agents, it should change the way our work is done
we expect that this will reduce our total corporate workforce
Are we done for?
Amazon boss tells staff AI means their jobs are at risk in coming years
Andrew Jassy tells white collar workers that such technology means fewer people will be needed for some jobs
the Guardian (www.theguardian.com)
Time for the AI teams to suddenly have tech issues.
"Sorry, the whole codebase is just gone! We have no idea what happened!"
"Must have been the S3 storage"
-
As we roll out more generative AI and agents, it should change the way our work is done
we expect that this will reduce our total corporate workforce
Are we done for?
Amazon boss tells staff AI means their jobs are at risk in coming years
Andrew Jassy tells white collar workers that such technology means fewer people will be needed for some jobs
the Guardian (www.theguardian.com)
Ah yes those famous "Agents". They will of course write themselves, adapt themselves to changing environment and run on their own without any supervision.
-
As we roll out more generative AI and agents, it should change the way our work is done
we expect that this will reduce our total corporate workforce
Are we done for?
Amazon boss tells staff AI means their jobs are at risk in coming years
Andrew Jassy tells white collar workers that such technology means fewer people will be needed for some jobs
the Guardian (www.theguardian.com)
Between AI and Robotics, we will likely have a permanently unemployed segment of close to 50%, or even more, within the next decade.
Not everyone will be able to be retrained to be a robotics engineer or AI programmer, and many, many jobs that are considered entry-level will disappear. Imagine a world where most fast food and retail workers are unemployed.
When 40% of America is unemployed, the government will be faced with 2 options - Universal Basic Income, or reducing the population by 40%. Which solution will each party embrace, and how will they accomplish their objectives?
-
Between AI and Robotics, we will likely have a permanently unemployed segment of close to 50%, or even more, within the next decade.
Not everyone will be able to be retrained to be a robotics engineer or AI programmer, and many, many jobs that are considered entry-level will disappear. Imagine a world where most fast food and retail workers are unemployed.
When 40% of America is unemployed, the government will be faced with 2 options - Universal Basic Income, or reducing the population by 40%. Which solution will each party embrace, and how will they accomplish their objectives?
Conclusions from a reductionist point of view. Circumstances, problems and solutions are generally complicated.
Moving on.
-
Conclusions from a reductionist point of view. Circumstances, problems and solutions are generally complicated.
Moving on.
How's the view with your head in the sand?
-
As we roll out more generative AI and agents, it should change the way our work is done
we expect that this will reduce our total corporate workforce
Are we done for?
Amazon boss tells staff AI means their jobs are at risk in coming years
Andrew Jassy tells white collar workers that such technology means fewer people will be needed for some jobs
the Guardian (www.theguardian.com)
It takes a special type of shithead to threaten peoples' jobs to their face without even knowing what the fuck they are talking about.
-
As we roll out more generative AI and agents, it should change the way our work is done
we expect that this will reduce our total corporate workforce
Are we done for?
Amazon boss tells staff AI means their jobs are at risk in coming years
Andrew Jassy tells white collar workers that such technology means fewer people will be needed for some jobs
the Guardian (www.theguardian.com)
I just want my shit delivered in under an hour by drones for now please
-
Time for the AI teams to suddenly have tech issues.
"Sorry, the whole codebase is just gone! We have no idea what happened!"
"Must have been the S3 storage"
Stupid question but what is stopping the software engineers to poison the well?
Insert malicious code, self destructing functions, have entire batches of code lost or corrupted, hardware damaged, etc?
-
Stupid question but what is stopping the software engineers to poison the well?
Insert malicious code, self destructing functions, have entire batches of code lost or corrupted, hardware damaged, etc?
A company with fuck off amount of legal power?
-
Oh, gimme a break.
This jerk is telling his workers that all their jobs are in jeopardy all the time, year after year. No news here. It's just his thing.
Probably he's trying to keep up the fear - booo hooooo...
But why? Why make them scared they'll lose their jobs at any moment Vs feeling secure?
If they're scared, they'll be seeking better employment, applying for other jobs whilst working this highly unstable one. Probably reduced productivity too, I wouldn't be as productive under that sort of negative environment.
Make them feel valued and secure though and they won't leave, there'll be less workplace issues for you to have to deal with, and they'll work harder.
Unless you see them as completely disposable because the law won't touch you and there will always be desperate people to fill those positions at any given time, fear is a ridiculous thing to want to instill in your workforce.
-
A company with fuck off amount of legal power?
Small acts of sabotage are easy to write off to causality, if well planned.
-
Stupid question but what is stopping the software engineers to poison the well?
Insert malicious code, self destructing functions, have entire batches of code lost or corrupted, hardware damaged, etc?
It's not a stupid question. From what I hear, people try stuff like this all the time, stuff like putting a bit of code on your employer's system that'll erase important files if you get shit canned and no longer appear on the payroll. It's why a lot of companies no longer give notice when ppl are fired, just have security walk them out. And unfortunately this stuff is often traceable, which means they're risking quite serious prosecution.
I don't like much of what I see, I think it's becoming clear that some new tech is going to have wide ranging and harmful effects. I'm not sure that doing luddite stuff will help but I can understand why people would think that way.
-
But why? Why make them scared they'll lose their jobs at any moment Vs feeling secure?
If they're scared, they'll be seeking better employment, applying for other jobs whilst working this highly unstable one. Probably reduced productivity too, I wouldn't be as productive under that sort of negative environment.
Make them feel valued and secure though and they won't leave, there'll be less workplace issues for you to have to deal with, and they'll work harder.
Unless you see them as completely disposable because the law won't touch you and there will always be desperate people to fill those positions at any given time, fear is a ridiculous thing to want to instill in your workforce.
It's abuser tactics - "You're lucky you've got me, no-one else would have you, now take more shit." It's cheaper than making employees feel happy and valued. And yeah, some very successful companies absolutely see their employees as disposable. I'm hoping this'll become a problem for them when they've burned through the available pool of vulnerable staff, but we don't seem to be there yet.
-
It's not a stupid question. From what I hear, people try stuff like this all the time, stuff like putting a bit of code on your employer's system that'll erase important files if you get shit canned and no longer appear on the payroll. It's why a lot of companies no longer give notice when ppl are fired, just have security walk them out. And unfortunately this stuff is often traceable, which means they're risking quite serious prosecution.
I don't like much of what I see, I think it's becoming clear that some new tech is going to have wide ranging and harmful effects. I'm not sure that doing luddite stuff will help but I can understand why people would think that way.
We could just regulate tech companies and outright ban some practices but since we apparently don't have time for rational solutions...
Well thought out sabotage can be written off to causality or involuntary human error.
Not giving notice of lay off is an abusive work practice and only shows how far we've allowed work conditions to degrade.
And that practice itself can be highly dangerous, if we consider a person can be midway into a complex task that can turn extremely difficult to follow by another: waste of time, resources, energy and money.
-
As we roll out more generative AI and agents, it should change the way our work is done
we expect that this will reduce our total corporate workforce
Are we done for?
Amazon boss tells staff AI means their jobs are at risk in coming years
Andrew Jassy tells white collar workers that such technology means fewer people will be needed for some jobs
the Guardian (www.theguardian.com)
yes, create a legion of angry, unemployed/unemployable people, that will go well for the capitalist system
-
But why? Why make them scared they'll lose their jobs at any moment Vs feeling secure?
If they're scared, they'll be seeking better employment, applying for other jobs whilst working this highly unstable one. Probably reduced productivity too, I wouldn't be as productive under that sort of negative environment.
Make them feel valued and secure though and they won't leave, there'll be less workplace issues for you to have to deal with, and they'll work harder.
Unless you see them as completely disposable because the law won't touch you and there will always be desperate people to fill those positions at any given time, fear is a ridiculous thing to want to instill in your workforce.
But why? Why make them scared they'll lose their jobs
Overly bossy bosses often believe that people work more, or perform better this way.
-
As we roll out more generative AI and agents, it should change the way our work is done
we expect that this will reduce our total corporate workforce
Are we done for?
Amazon boss tells staff AI means their jobs are at risk in coming years
Andrew Jassy tells white collar workers that such technology means fewer people will be needed for some jobs
the Guardian (www.theguardian.com)
Amazon is currently hemorrhaging executive level and above engineers. Amazon will have to be replacing these jobs with AI cause every one of value has already left/is leaving and filling those jobs with qualified people at that level is actually a lot more difficult than more junior level positions.
