3 ms·

You might be repeating it because it's a baseless assertion. Where's the proof? OpenAI seems to be hiring lots of people [1]. Should they at least be able to d

You might be repeating it because it's a baseless assertion. Where's the proof? OpenAI seems to be hiring lots of people [1]. Should they at least be able to do more with less? Can you answer my question about an "AI native" company that never even had people to replace? [1] https://openai.com/careers/search/ https://openai.com/careers/search/

jack_pp 2y ago
Ah so the company that produced the most cutting edge technology needs to hire more people to stay ahead.. and that's proof LLMs aren't making most of the programmers in the trenches more productive. Let's see if an LLM can reason better than you do. (You're Alice btw) : Alice's response has a few issues: Shifts the Goalpost: Bob's point was about AI's impact on existing jobs—he's arguing that AI increases productivity, not that companies like OpenAI don't need people. Alice shifts the discussion to whether OpenAI, an AI company, is hiring people, which isn't directly relevant to Bob's claim. Strawman Argument: She implies that if AI is truly productive, OpenAI shouldn't need to hire. But OpenAI is in a high-growth phase, likely hiring to build and maintain the technology, not to replace traditional roles with AI. AI productivity doesn't mean zero hiring—it often means hiring in different areas or scaling faster. Burden of Proof Misstep: Alice demands proof from Bob while making her own claim ("baseless assertion") without providing evidence that AI is directly causing 1:1 replacements. Weak "AI Native" Point: The question about "AI native" companies might sound clever, but it doesn't address Bob's core argument about existing companies using AI to do more with fewer people. Alice's frustration is understandable, but her argument misses the mark because it's more about OpenAI's hiring practices than the broader point of productivity gains through AI.
- PessimalDecimal 2y ago
  I can't tell if you even read through these or just pasted them. I (Alice) supposedly made my own claim without providing evident that AI is directly causing 1:1 replacements. I think you (really whatever "AI" tool you used without much critique of its output) have this entirely backwards. That's the most glaring, but not only issue with all of this. Sort of proving my point here...
  - jack_pp 2y ago
    You don't seem to understand the basic reality of most software development jobs which basically anyone with over 100 IQ can do with like 6 months of training from scratch. Most software developers don't work for Google. They don't need a degree. They are making basic crud applications or some other apps that are chaining APIs or libraries together. The difference between a junior and a senior in these kind of jobs is productivity and code quality/ maintainability. If you don't think current gen LLMs help with that you are delusional
gdhkgdhkvff 2y ago
Some quick searching says openai had a headcount of 3500 employees in 2024. It also had a valuation of $150billion. Another search says $150 billion companies tend to average 10000-50000 employees. So it does seem like they’re doing more with less. A different search says average company with $3 billion revenue has 5000-10000 employees. Either way OpenAI seems to be running leaner than average.

jack_pp 2y ago

Ah so the company that produced the most cutting edge technology needs to hire more people to stay ahead.. and that's proof LLMs aren't making most of the programmers in the trenches more productive. Let's see if an LLM can reason better than you do. (You're Alice btw) : Alice's response has a few issues: Shifts the Goalpost: Bob's point was about AI's impact on existing jobs—he's arguing that AI increases productivity, not that companies like OpenAI don't need people. Alice shifts the discussion to whether OpenAI, an AI company, is hiring people, which isn't directly relevant to Bob's claim. Strawman Argument: She implies that if AI is truly productive, OpenAI shouldn't need to hire. But OpenAI is in a high-growth phase, likely hiring to build and maintain the technology, not to replace traditional roles with AI. AI productivity doesn't mean zero hiring—it often means hiring in different areas or scaling faster. Burden of Proof Misstep: Alice demands proof from Bob while making her own claim ("baseless assertion") without providing evidence that AI is directly causing 1:1 replacements. Weak "AI Native" Point: The question about "AI native" companies might sound clever, but it doesn't address Bob's core argument about existing companies using AI to do more with fewer people. Alice's frustration is understandable, but her argument misses the mark because it's more about OpenAI's hiring practices than the broader point of productivity gains through AI.

PessimalDecimal 2y ago
I can't tell if you even read through these or just pasted them. I (Alice) supposedly made my own claim without providing evident that AI is directly causing 1:1 replacements. I think you (really whatever "AI" tool you used without much critique of its output) have this entirely backwards. That's the most glaring, but not only issue with all of this. Sort of proving my point here...
- jack_pp 2y ago
  You don't seem to understand the basic reality of most software development jobs which basically anyone with over 100 IQ can do with like 6 months of training from scratch. Most software developers don't work for Google. They don't need a degree. They are making basic crud applications or some other apps that are chaining APIs or libraries together. The difference between a junior and a senior in these kind of jobs is productivity and code quality/ maintainability. If you don't think current gen LLMs help with that you are delusional

gdhkgdhkvff 2y ago

Some quick searching says openai had a headcount of 3500 employees in 2024. It also had a valuation of $150billion. Another search says $150 billion companies tend to average 10000-50000 employees. So it does seem like they’re doing more with less. A different search says average company with $3 billion revenue has 5000-10000 employees. Either way OpenAI seems to be running leaner than average.