3 ms·

[Spoiler alert - look away now if you haven't read the story] I'd expect the logical extension to this to wholly be using AI for the managerial aspect of bring

[Spoiler alert - look away now if you haven't read the story] I'd expect the logical extension to this to wholly be using AI for the managerial aspect of bringing you into the conversation. Employers will have the right to make use of a manger's likeness for reasons they see fit, such as using a bot to layoff their direct reports. Removes the emotional liability from the manager.

halfmatthalfcat 3y ago
These AI doomer predictions get more and more detached from reality.
- sys_64738 3y ago
  The naivety of many people still staggers me. Life has a lot to teach you yet, grasshopper.
  - halfmatthalfcat 3y ago
    Thanks for the life lesson Dad.
    - imacomputer 3y ago
      Yay we have turned into reddit.
- Frost1x 3y ago
  Why do you think a class of folks with asymmetric access to a given resource, because of costs to access and use such resources creating barrier to entry, would not use those very asymmetric resources to their advantage when possible? So long as the prediction is viable from a technological and execution level, I don’t see why it has to be labeled “doomer.” If it’s possible and people can exploit it to their advantage, they will, that’s humans.
  - halfmatthalfcat 3y ago
    People have been saying the same thing about off/near-shoring for decades. "X will be replaced by cheaper Y" but that has not materialized in any way. If anything, the opposite has been proven as demand for high-skilled labor continue to push salaries and competition for positions up. The amount of AI is coming for X or AI will replace Y is so unfounded at this point, I'm chalking it up with FSD-levels of hype. It remains to be seen whether it actually proves useful at any _real_ scale.
    - Frost1x 3y ago
      > People have been saying the same thing about off/near-shoring for decades. "X will be replaced by cheaper Y" but that has not materialized in any way. Eh? It absolutely has in many industries. It also has been tried many times in software, it just tends to fail, so the fact the option was there and perceived as an advantage and acted upon is exactly my point. It very well could happen and it absolutely has and has been tried, as soon as it was viable. When it comes to the above comment about grabbing the likeness of an individual to create an artificial human interface to the layoff process, “deep fake” approaches already exist and are very viable, it’s simply a matter of signing over yet another right in an employment contract. Some groups are already doing this with entertainers and public facing figures because there’s a lot of value in it. So long as it’s cheap to capture a bit of imagery from an employee and cheap enough to overlay and generate video for, how unbelievable is it that a business would simulate a manager figure to lay you off in a conversation pretending to be personable? Technologically we’re not that far away. At some point you might even be able to crawl internal business conversations to gather personal characteristics and tailor a script or even the appearance of the simulated human to reduce reaction to a layoff message, assuming the risk to cost made sense. I put nothing off the table of possibilities from groups of sociopaths with power, unless it’s quite literally impossible or too costly to do.
      - jprete 3y ago
        I'm reminded of a recent news story where scammers used multiple AI deepfakes on video calls to convince someone in a financial corporation to transfer them some 25 million dollars. So I'm thinking it's possible to do this _right now_.
xena 3y ago
Something that got pruned from the final draft was the manager also being there to monitor the call, but also an AI duplicate. I thought that was too creepy and it would make it too realistic, so it was left on the cutting-room floor.
- samatman 3y ago
  I enjoyed the story, and want to offer some mild feedback. I found the reuse of "Hooli" from Silicon Valley distracting, spent the next few paragraphs wondering if this was supposed to be SV fanfic. I can think of a number of fake company names which would immediately suggest Google to the reader, without having that effect, as I'm sure you can as well.
  - xena 3y ago
    Oh, that was left in? It was supposed to be E100. Oops! Fixing.

halfmatthalfcat 3y ago

These AI doomer predictions get more and more detached from reality.

sys_64738 3y ago
The naivety of many people still staggers me. Life has a lot to teach you yet, grasshopper.
- halfmatthalfcat 3y ago
  Thanks for the life lesson Dad.
  - imacomputer 3y ago
    Yay we have turned into reddit.
Frost1x 3y ago
Why do you think a class of folks with asymmetric access to a given resource, because of costs to access and use such resources creating barrier to entry, would not use those very asymmetric resources to their advantage when possible? So long as the prediction is viable from a technological and execution level, I don’t see why it has to be labeled “doomer.” If it’s possible and people can exploit it to their advantage, they will, that’s humans.
- halfmatthalfcat 3y ago
  People have been saying the same thing about off/near-shoring for decades. "X will be replaced by cheaper Y" but that has not materialized in any way. If anything, the opposite has been proven as demand for high-skilled labor continue to push salaries and competition for positions up. The amount of AI is coming for X or AI will replace Y is so unfounded at this point, I'm chalking it up with FSD-levels of hype. It remains to be seen whether it actually proves useful at any _real_ scale.
  - Frost1x 3y ago
    > People have been saying the same thing about off/near-shoring for decades. "X will be replaced by cheaper Y" but that has not materialized in any way. Eh? It absolutely has in many industries. It also has been tried many times in software, it just tends to fail, so the fact the option was there and perceived as an advantage and acted upon is exactly my point. It very well could happen and it absolutely has and has been tried, as soon as it was viable. When it comes to the above comment about grabbing the likeness of an individual to create an artificial human interface to the layoff process, “deep fake” approaches already exist and are very viable, it’s simply a matter of signing over yet another right in an employment contract. Some groups are already doing this with entertainers and public facing figures because there’s a lot of value in it. So long as it’s cheap to capture a bit of imagery from an employee and cheap enough to overlay and generate video for, how unbelievable is it that a business would simulate a manager figure to lay you off in a conversation pretending to be personable? Technologically we’re not that far away. At some point you might even be able to crawl internal business conversations to gather personal characteristics and tailor a script or even the appearance of the simulated human to reduce reaction to a layoff message, assuming the risk to cost made sense. I put nothing off the table of possibilities from groups of sociopaths with power, unless it’s quite literally impossible or too costly to do.
    - jprete 3y ago
      I'm reminded of a recent news story where scammers used multiple AI deepfakes on video calls to convince someone in a financial corporation to transfer them some 25 million dollars. So I'm thinking it's possible to do this _right now_.

xena 3y ago

Something that got pruned from the final draft was the manager also being there to monitor the call, but also an AI duplicate. I thought that was too creepy and it would make it too realistic, so it was left on the cutting-room floor.

samatman 3y ago
I enjoyed the story, and want to offer some mild feedback. I found the reuse of "Hooli" from Silicon Valley distracting, spent the next few paragraphs wondering if this was supposed to be SV fanfic. I can think of a number of fake company names which would immediately suggest Google to the reader, without having that effect, as I'm sure you can as well.
- xena 3y ago
  Oh, that was left in? It was supposed to be E100. Oops! Fixing.