3 ms·

Why are other outlets quoting the CEO as having said that the layoffs have "nothing to do with AI"? Is TC distinguishing between using AI versus building AI pr

Why are other outlets quoting the CEO as having said that the layoffs have "nothing to do with AI"? Is TC distinguishing between using AI versus building AI products? > "None of it had to do with AI," Goodarzi told CNBC's Jim Cramer on "Mad Money." "Everything was about how do we become more effective." https://www.cnbc.com/2026/05/20/intuit-ceo-says-companys-17percent-workforce-cut-had-nothing-to-do-with-ai.html https://www.cnbc.com/2026/05/20/intuit-ceo-says-companys-17p...

golly_ned 5mo ago
Seriously, the article says exactly the opposite.
- bloppe 5mo ago
  The article was written by AI
  - zknill 5mo ago
    How do you know? There's a lazy habit from some folks to say something they either disagree with or don't understand was "written by AI" without backing up that statement.
    - Melatonic 5mo ago
      It's becoming the modern adult equivalent of the old kids saying: " I know you are but what AmI ? "
    - true_religion 5mo ago
      I don’t think it’s AI. AI would at least keep the article body consistent with the title even if it had to bend over backward and hallucinate new facts.
      - eru 5mo ago
        That would maybe be true, if AI wrote both the title and the body of the article. In human practice, some hack usually writes the body, but the editor decides the title. And that can happen after the article is written or before. I don't think they would change that workflow, even if the writer, or both writer and editor, were replaced with a AI. So yours was a good observation, but it's rather weak evidence.
    - shantnutiwari 5mo ago
      >>There's a lazy habit from some folks to say something they either disagree with or don't understand was "written by AI" without backing up that statement. Thank you for saying this, I keep arguing the same. "This is llm" has become lazy for "I dont like this so I will pretend its llm"
      - Citizen_Lame 5mo ago
        That's because most of the LLM output is associated with low effort spam, and they are not wrong. You keep fighting for LLM rights, lol.
        grep_name 5mo ago
        ^ this comment was written by an llm. See the problem?
        ffsm8 5mo ago
        People usually make the determination by reading at least part of the text and then find multiple smoking guns / llm-isms The comment you responded to did not have those. Fwiw, the article we're commenting on was likely not LLM written. The sentence structure is too convoluted, no LLM would've generated it like that - unless very carefully prompted ... But at that point it's no longer pure AI slop (imo).
    - glimshe 5mo ago
      I'll start downvoting all posts that are about criticizing something solely because it was "made by AI". Humans using AI can make great things. If the article is bad, just say "this is a bad article without coherent arguments" or something like that.
    - mancerayder 5mo ago
      "You're absolutely right to question that. Let me restate that correctly. Just facts. No fluff."
croes 5mo ago
> according to an internal memo seen by Reuters on Wednesday. vs. > Goodarzi told CNBC's Jim Cramer on "Mad Money." Reality vs. PR BS
markdown 5mo ago
> "Everything was about how do we become more effective at extracting profits from this business." FTFGoodarzi
- tdeck 5mo ago
  They're laying people off to focus more on lobbying.

golly_ned 5mo ago

Seriously, the article says exactly the opposite.

bloppe 5mo ago
The article was written by AI
- zknill 5mo ago
  How do you know? There's a lazy habit from some folks to say something they either disagree with or don't understand was "written by AI" without backing up that statement.
  - Melatonic 5mo ago
    It's becoming the modern adult equivalent of the old kids saying: " I know you are but what AmI ? "
  - true_religion 5mo ago
    I don’t think it’s AI. AI would at least keep the article body consistent with the title even if it had to bend over backward and hallucinate new facts.
    - eru 5mo ago
      That would maybe be true, if AI wrote both the title and the body of the article. In human practice, some hack usually writes the body, but the editor decides the title. And that can happen after the article is written or before. I don't think they would change that workflow, even if the writer, or both writer and editor, were replaced with a AI. So yours was a good observation, but it's rather weak evidence.
  - shantnutiwari 5mo ago
    >>There's a lazy habit from some folks to say something they either disagree with or don't understand was "written by AI" without backing up that statement. Thank you for saying this, I keep arguing the same. "This is llm" has become lazy for "I dont like this so I will pretend its llm"
    - Citizen_Lame 5mo ago
      That's because most of the LLM output is associated with low effort spam, and they are not wrong. You keep fighting for LLM rights, lol.
      - grep_name 5mo ago
        ^ this comment was written by an llm. See the problem?
        ffsm8 5mo ago
        People usually make the determination by reading at least part of the text and then find multiple smoking guns / llm-isms The comment you responded to did not have those. Fwiw, the article we're commenting on was likely not LLM written. The sentence structure is too convoluted, no LLM would've generated it like that - unless very carefully prompted ... But at that point it's no longer pure AI slop (imo).
  - glimshe 5mo ago
    I'll start downvoting all posts that are about criticizing something solely because it was "made by AI". Humans using AI can make great things. If the article is bad, just say "this is a bad article without coherent arguments" or something like that.
  - mancerayder 5mo ago
    "You're absolutely right to question that. Let me restate that correctly. Just facts. No fluff."

croes 5mo ago

> according to an internal memo seen by Reuters on Wednesday. vs. > Goodarzi told CNBC's Jim Cramer on "Mad Money." Reality vs. PR BS

markdown 5mo ago

> "Everything was about how do we become more effective at extracting profits from this business." FTFGoodarzi

tdeck 5mo ago
They're laying people off to focus more on lobbying.