Excuse me, but the industries AI is disrupting are not lucrative

kpw@kbin.social to Technology@lemmy.world – 107 points – Excuse me, but the industries AI is disrupting are not lucrative
theintrinsicperspective.com

A more interesting “bear case” for AI is that, if you look at the list of industries that leading AIs like GPT-4 are capable of disrupting—and therefore making money off of—the list is lackluster from a return-on-investment perspective, because the industries themselves are not very lucrative. What are AIs of the GPT-4 generation best at? It’s things like:

writing essays or short fictions

digital art

chatting

programming assistance
31

You are viewing a single comment
View all comments

Weird that AI isnt replacing things like management, CEOs, stock investors, accountants... you know, jobs that tend to be about numbers and efficiency, which you would think AI would excel at.

Instead, we have it skirting copyright by stealing other people works and changing it just enough to not be a direct copy.

stock investors, accountants

Computers already replaced a lot of them long ago.

management, CEOs

What part of their jobs do you think an AI can replace?

What part of their jobs do you think an AI can replace?

The whole sitting around, profiting from actual laborers part, I'm guessing.

The fucking antiwork crowd is insufferable and intellectually dishonest. Be better. This is such a sad comment.

Why? Why can an AI not replace a CEO? And why has CEO compensation risen, while average worker compensation dropped, all while worker output has increased over the past decades? That seems like simple math, that the money isn't going to who it should be going to and is just going to management and investors because they make the rules

The issue you're speaking about is an issue of oligopoles and giant businesses, not ceos and management. It's a breakdown of economic principles, namely, supply and demand of labor, due to oligopoles.

And giant businesses and oligopolies are led by.... who exactly? Sure, you can say "not all CEOs" but still, too many CEOs.

I do appreciate the added nuance and more accuracy tho.

There are thousands of unproblmatic ceos to every problematic ceo.

You issue is with the top couple hundred businesses. There are literally 100s of thousands of ceos, managers, and leadership individuals who are not part of the problem. Look at the responses here. This group think mob would have you believe every single ceo is Satan.

Thousands for every one, eh? You got a citation for that wild claim, friendo? I mean, talk about bootlicking. FFS

Just go look up how many businesses there are in America. You can do some rough math based on that, shouldn't be too hard. It's amazing you call me a bootlicker over pretty tame comments that really shouldn't be controversial. You antiwork folk really hate every business owner no matter what, don't ya?

As a business owner myself, I now know you're even more full of shit than I knew before. Well done.

You're a useful idiot for the billionaire class. You'll never earn what they lucked (or were born) into regardless of how hard you try. Wake up, bootlicker.

Stop simping for the rich. They don't love you.

You really think all ceos and managers do zero work?

You do realize there are closed of companies that aren't Amazon and tesla, right?

There are literally tens of thousands of ceos of small companies and non profits that work their ass off.

This is why you are being intellectually dishonest. You're not that stupid, but you won't admit it.

the part where they collect all the money and go on vacations cant be replaced by ai but could certainly be extinguished.

Not to darken your perspective, but you don't really think that AI's gonna remain as fundamentally stupid as it is currently, do you? As soon as any sort of self-awareness crops up (could be decades, could be months), you think it'll just install a global UBI, etc. and make all human life equally enjoyable and kush? Follow-up question: care to share what you're smoking?

Oh this day can come, but we're pretty much at the birth of this thing and what we have now is not close. There are a lot of cool theories currently but I don't really think we can really predict it this far for now. I think right now its beholden to its masters, so the capitalist elites will have their say on how we use it for now.

What I meant was that the job of a CEO doesn't really need to exist in its current form.

Follow up answer: I guess I smoke a variety of those types of things but way too seldomly to really give you a good answer.

All fair points, and if you're ever on the Upper Left Coast, drop me a line. It all but grows on trees out here. 🤌🏼

Dead line tracking, task tracking, and strategy creation with analysis over large datasets.

Acting as a trusted third part referencing agreed apon policy for conflict resolution. Decision making based on large data sets, relevent legal documents and company policy.

There is A LOT of work to go for current systems to do this work in a way that is trusted by stakeholders, but I see a lot of these tasks being more and more possible to done well enough to see it taking hold or at least supplementing existing tools.

In an ideal world the stake holders are the employees and community and the AI is constantly learning from and teaching the stakeholders to maintain cohesion and alignment.

Thank you for a serious answer.