autaut

This is a very good point. So many times I would refactor entire parts of the code base just because it’s getting too complicated and an easier solution was possible. AI is do often just let’s drill down all these variables, whatever

I’m not really convinced by any of this, in fact it seems most of the predictions were pretty correct and that Meta and Alphabet are having big issues is a shared opinion by multiple observers and pretty much every employee they have.

If they were doing so well why the layoffs? Why the tightening both in salaries and perks and work life balance? Why so many choices disrupting morale for their employees?

Human cloning, bio weapons are two fast examples

I’ve seen this before. The result is a revolving door of temporary work. Because soon companies will be “you already put 6 months in, we don’t have enough signal work 6 more months” and at the year mark they swap you for a new candidate.

And before you say that this is inefficient consider that despite being terrible for morale and efficiency (proven in un’etica studies) companies still maintain the bottom 10% out or up or out policies.

Companies always love their power on their employee over efficiency.

Musk cutting the headcount and everything working fine is a myth he perpetrated. In reality things started to go badly almost immediately, big advertisers left.

He then wrapped x in xAI where effectively they are developing new features in x. So that now we effectively don’t really know what the head count is.

I worked in a company that did that. They couldn't rehire the senior after the junior burned with a bug 700k in 20 min by touching a part of the codebase no one had context for anymore.

In the 70 and 80s ppl kept their lifestyle by having their spouse starting to work. In the 90s and 2000s it was with credit cards. In the 2010s it was apps offering artificially deflated prices to corner markets. And now it’s gambling and buying burritos w Klara.

I think tech ceo got a little bit too excited and their mask fell off and started saying “oh yeah, you don’t like it? Too bad nothing you can do about it”. You’ll see them quickly backpedal to woke 1.0 when it turns out they were a bit too quick about it.

I don’t think the public hates ai. I think AI needs a lot of money so it loudly only pursued the light-bendingly rich by leveraging the only two emotions they have: 1) greed: you will be able to fire all your employees 2) fear: if you don’t buy it someone else will and that is too dangerous for you

Of course normal people found this incredibly off putting.

They don’t give severance to be nice, severance is hush money. To get the severance employees have to agree to forgo any legal claim they could have with the company. They have calculated that it’s cheaper to offer this money than to have to pay lawyers to defend the company from pissed former employees seeking to drag the company to court.

No they couldn’t because the severance is paid out of the money the budget set aside for wages for the year. So out of the 12 months, they give 4 months to the laid off worker and Facebook pockets the other 8 months.

I believe that it's a bit more complicated than that especially if we look at the contributions of IMEC.

But irregardless I can hand you the point that you are making and then say that yours is a very tight standard that would not pass most of what passes for innovation in Silicon Valley.

The point I'm trying to make for the initial poster is that they are confusing "technological innovation" for money making. And yes you don't have a money printing machine in the EU, but you have A LOT of technological innovation that eventually goes to market through SV.