3 ms·
no one is stating "we've replaced X% of our workforce with AI" That's only worth doing if you're trying to cut costs though. If the company has unmet ambitions
by onion2k 2y ago
no one is stating "we've replaced X% of our workforce with AI"
That's only worth doing if you're trying to cut costs though. If the company has unmet ambitions there's no reason to shrink the headcount from 10 to 8 and have the same amount of output when you can keep 10 people and have the output of 12 by leveraging AI.
- hyperpape 2y agoAlmost all the big tech companies have had layoffs over the past several years. I think it’s safe to say cost cutting is very much part of their goal.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- lupire 2y agoBut the specific roles being laid off are arbitrary, and the overall goal headcount reduction is driven by macroeconomics factors (I'm being generous there), not based on new efficiencies. Note the difft between "cost cutting" (do less, to lower cost) and "efficiency" (do same, but with less cost)
- theptip 2y agoThe goal of these cost cutting initiatives is not an absolute reduction in cost, but a relative one. They needed to show an improvement in operating margin, ie % of revenue spent on engineers. If your engineers become 20% more efficient then your margins are better and your problem is solved. (Indeed if you have tech that can make any engineer 20% more efficient then you are back in the game of hiring as many as you can find, as long as each added engineer brings in enough additional revenue.)
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]