• mojo_raisin@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    3 months ago

    The job of CEO seems the far easier to replace with AI. A fairly basic algorithm with weighted goals and parameters (chosen by the board) + LLM + character avatar would probably perform better than most CEOs. Leave out the LLM if you want it to spout nonsense like this Amazon Cloud CEO.

  • CaptPretentious@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    3 months ago

    That guy has never seen AI code before. It regularly gets even simple stuff wrong. Was he especially good is when it gives made up crap. Or it tells you a method or function you can use but doesn’t tell you where it got that. And then you’re like “oh wow I didn’t realize that was available” and then you try it and realize that’s not part of the standard library and you ask it “where did you get that” and it’s like “oh yeah sorry about that I don’t know”.

    • piecat@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      3 months ago

      My absolute favorite is when I asked copilot to code a UI button and it just pasted “// the UI element should do (…) but instead it is doing (…)” a dozen times.

      Like, clearly someone on stackoverflow asked for help, got used for training data, and confused copilot

    • telllos@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      When my job was outsouced a few years back, I was thinking there is probably a boat load of indien coming out of management schools that would do a great job at C level ! For a fraction of the price.

  • FiniteBanjo@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    Everyone was always joking about how AI should just replace CEOs, but it turns out CEOs are so easily lead by the nose that AI companies practically already run the show.

  • yarr@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    3 months ago

    Let me weigh in with something. The hard part about programming is not the code. It is in understanding all the edge cases, making flexible solutions and so much more.

    I have seen many organizations with tens of really capable programmers that can implement anything. Now, most management barely knows what they want or what the actual end goal is. Since managers aren’t capable of delivering perfect products every time with really skilled programmers, if i subtract programmers from the equation and substitute in a magic box that delivers code to managers whenever they ask for it, the managers won’t do much better. The biggest problem is not knowing what to ask for, and even if you DO know what to ask for, they typically will ignore all the fine details.

    By the time there is an AI intelligent enough to coordinate a large technical operation, AIs will be capable of replacing attorneys, congressmen, patent examiners, middle managers, etc. It would really take a GENERAL artificial intelligence to be feasible here, and you’d be wildly optimistic to say we are anywhere close to having one of those available on the open market.

    • Tamo240@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      I agree with you completely, but he did say no need for ‘human programmers’ not 'human software engineers. The skill set you are describing is one I would put forward is one of if not the biggest different between the two.

      • yarr@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        This is really splitting hairs, but if you asked that cloud CEO if he employed programmers or ‘software engineers’ he would almost certainly say the latter. The larger the company, the greater the chance they have what they consider an ‘engineering’ department. I would guess he employs 0 “programmers” or ‘engineeringless programmers’.

        • Tamo240@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          Anyone in software engineering will tell you that as you get more senior you spend less time writing lines of code and more time planning, designing, testing, reviewing, and deleting code.

          This will continue to be true, it’s just that there will be less juniors below who’s whole job is to produce code that meets a predefined spec or passes an existing test, and instead a smaller number of juniors will use AI tools to increase their productivity, while still requiring the same amount of direction and oversight. The small amounts of code the seniors write will also get smaller and faster to write, as they also use AI tools to generate boilerplate while filling in the important details.

  • trolololol@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    3 months ago

    I hope this helps people understand that you don’t get to be CEO by being smart or working hard. It’s all influence and gossip all the way up.

      • trolololol@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        Yep if I had that kind of money and surrounded by like minded people I’d agree. Unfortunately I’m cursed with a rational mind 🙃🙃🙃

  • deegeese@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    3 months ago

    Guy who buys programmers and sells AI thinks he can sell more AI and stop buying programmers.

    This is up there with Uber pretending self driving cars will make them rich.

      • IphtashuFitz@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        Not until a self driving car can safely handle all manner of edge cases thrown at it, and I don’t see that happening any time soon. The cars would need to be able to recognize situations that may not be explicitly programmed into it, and figure out a safe way to deal with it.

        • massive_bereavement@fedia.io
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          As someone said on this thread: as soon as they can convince legislators, even if they are murder machines, capital will go for it.

          Borrowing from my favorite movie: “it’s just a glitch”.

          • IphtashuFitz@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            3 months ago

            I doubt it. The liability would be far too great. Ambulance chasing lawyers would salivate at the chance to represent the families of pedestrians struck and killed by buggy self driving cars. Those capitalists don’t want endless years of class action cases tying up their profits.

            • Nommer@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              3 months ago

              When was the last time a corporation got anything other than a slap on the wrist and a small donation to the government just so they could keep doing what they’re doing?

  • L0rdMathias@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    3 months ago

    “Guy who was fed a pay-to-win degree at a nepotism practicing school with a silver spoon shares fantasy, to his fan base that own large publications, about replacing hard working and intelligent employees with machines he is unable to comprehend the most basic features of”

  • exanime@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    3 months ago

    Wasn’t it the rabbit 1 scammer who said programmers would be gone in 5 years, like 3 years ago?

  • Omega_Jimes@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    3 months ago

    For like, a couple years, sure. Then there will be a huge push to fix all the weird shit generated by AI.

  • MoonRaven@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    3 months ago

    But you have to describe what it is. If only we had universal languages to do that… Oh yeah, it’s code.

  • Hackworth@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    3 months ago

    “Coding” was never the source of value, and people shouldn’t get overly attached to it. Problem solving is the core skill. The discipline and precision demanded by traditional programming will remain valuable transferable attributes, but they won’t be a barrier to entry. - John Carmack