No diss to the OP, but is there any point to sharing posts like this? 1) the headline is bait for a story content that's at best inconclusive, 2) of the two s

No diss to the OP, but is there any point to sharing posts like this? 1) the headline is bait for a story content that's at best inconclusive, 2) of the two sources for this story, one analyst's point that IT spending on AI outpaced new hires seems to do most of the post's heavy lifting, 3) the second source -- an Indeed economist -- makes almost the opposite point that after increased spending on AI at the expense of new hires, spending on the is stabilizing 4) And this entire story appears to be based on *one month's worth of job reporting* I understand why a WSJ reported is professionally required to spin something out of a nothingburger and convert attention into ad impressions and "provoke debate" or whatever, but for those of us uninterested in WSJ or Rupert Murdoch's success this feels as unhelpful as that post from a week or so ago about yet another (inconclusive A.F.) study on the effects of marijuanablahblahblah ...