4 ms·
Real-talk: using an LLM for CEO-work makes sense for when hard, rational, decisions need to be made (e.g. new divisions, layoffs, expansion, etc) - but CEOs als
by DaiPlusPlus 2y ago
Real-talk: using an LLM for CEO-work makes sense for when hard, rational, decisions need to be made (e.g. new divisions, layoffs, expansion, etc) - but CEOs also need to be a leader and inspire confidence in their subordinates - a non-human agent with non-human motivations simply can’t do that.
- listenallyall 2y agoI'd expect that AI making top-level decisions would be disastrous for employees, especially in tech. An AI is going to relentlessly push for efficiency, and human talent simply can't be reduced to a single input to measure against cost (salary, benefits, devtools, etc). AI will constantly suggest lower costs and thus fewer people, it has no perception of product quality or satisfaction, and it's always going to question the value of the employees' contributions to building software (or other stuff), especially if those employees are themselves relying on AI assistance.
- Aurornis 2y ago> using an LLM for CEO-work makes sense for when hard, rational, decisions need to be made (e.g. new divisions, layoffs, expansion, etc) Hard disagree. Using an LLM for these decisions transforms it into a game of manipulating inputs. If you thought it was bad when people were gaming metrics for performance reviews, imagine the nightmare of a company where everyone is trying to manipulate their work to appeal to the current preferences of the prompts HR is feeding to the LLM. Now imagine the HR people manipulating the prompts to get the answers they want, or leaking the prompts to their friends. Without humans in the loop to recognize when incentives are being gamed it becomes a free for all.