I will never understand how is it that such idiots repeatedly make it to the top.
it’s all about the networking at that level. Doesn’t matter how much of a blithering idiot you are so long as you know a guy who knows a guy to get you in.
MBAs and such are trained in being confident without knowing anything besides different business grifts.
It’s partly the fact that hundreds of millions of people the world over, possibly several billion people, believe that they only got there because they were competent and do nothing to stop them.
csuites and ceos, are all the result of nepotism, there isnt such a thing as working your way up ofr those positions.
It’s like these assholes have never heard the phrase “too good to be true”.
People who get paid exorbitant sums for doing exceptionally little probably try to avoid that concept
They are usually the ones setting up the too good to be true situations, so they probably never thought they would be on the receiving end of one.
So they thought it would be free forever, and are surprised by the usage based pricing? I wonder what will happen when ai companies need to be profitable and increase prices accordingly
they thought by paying for AI in its current form will lead to less employee overhead , thereby reducing cost. which dint happen.
Cant wait to see their reaction when AI replaces them
Big tech will suck dry everyone, even their own rich friends.
nividia is sucking dry the big tech companies, so to speak they got thier money upfront for just leasing out the chips years ahead.
It was a matter of time honestly, anyone with the basic metrics of usage of an service was gonna get screwed over. With people you can actually say hey labor’s too high and lay people off and have a shitty excuse. This is just you’re stupid.
They should have listened to Ed.
One would expect they kind of think stuff through before acting on it
Dumb donkeys.
oh
an astonishing 29 percent of [execs] had no idea where the growing costs associated with AI were coming from.
The headline combined with the quote just make me laugh so much, I love it
This is what happens when the people in charge of everything are entirely separated from reality.
Those same idiots have been in charge of everything for decades, blindly doing whatever suited them.
They got duped and didn’t have the technical competence to see it or trust their staff to negotiate it.
Every IT / Developer out there knew it was a bad idea. The C-Staff was sold by the billionaires that you will go AI or you will be left behind.
My own CEO is simultaneously telling us to use AI for as much as we can and telling us to reduce costs as much as possible.
The “you’ll be left behind” nonsense makes me laugh. Left behind from what exactly? Lol
The sales pitch is:
All your competition is going AI. They’re be producing 10x the work with mouth breathing morons at the keys, while you’re stuck paying millions to subject matter experts.
They’re scared ot death that the tenuous hold they have on their market segment will be severed if their competition outflanks them in this, so FUD wins.
This isn’t just in industry or tech. I work in the academy. You would be shocked how many people from administrators all the way on down truly believe this. That, without any proof, this technology is going to make everybody a billion times more productive and that any graduates who don’t have this is a foundational skill will surely not survive in the future workforce.
“it’s technology and science, it must be good!”
Man, you would be shocked how resistant to tech and innovation some of us are unless, I guess, you promise the world with your racist chatbot.
deleted by creator
and professors using it to screen out AI themselves, or using it to make lectures. this is for university level,
That is a fine hypothesis, but that has nothing to do with how I run my classes. Or anyone in my department for that matter.
Someone else can output more slop than us!
And faster slop! Turbo slop even
Yeah, that isn’t how this works. You don’t want to be the one using the software while it’s still in beta. Wait until the dust settles before committing to anything. Besides which the super-urgent "You have to buy now!" FOMO sales pitch is a classic strategy for scammers.
on the grift since its basically a rehashed version of crypto.
That’s because they bought into the pitch that AI will replace employees (or at least large number of employees) they understand that they will still need to build tooling that would facilitate that and believe that once other companies will say they eliminated employees this way the companies that are “are left behind” will be stuck still needing employees that will catch up to this plan and refuse to help company to get there.
I told my boss this:
- Right now the AI race has a lot of similarities to the dotcom bubble. The subject is packed with risky loans based on huge debts. Those huge debts are expecting to be paid as AI becomes profitable, but AI companies are largely loosing money.
- All those loans and infrastructure create the burden of sunk costs leading to a desperate need to succeed.
- The people feeling that desperation are the same people who own the largest marketing, news, and social media networks in the world.
- As a result, there’s a lot of hype around AI. A lot of “kool-aid,” and everyone wants you to drink it. If you drink the kool-aid, that means you’re also bought into the problem. You also need it to succeed, thus making their problem into your problem.
I explained to him that mature, professional use of AI is going to wind up following a similar path to data engineering. It’ll start with bullshit standards, “prompt engineers” and the like, but eventually SE disciplines are going to define who makes best use of AI. You’re going to have niche use cases for daemon AIs, local LLMs, and remote models. You’ll have stronger frameworks around session management, context management, agent permissions, …
It’s not going to be like this forever, “dump all your shit into our web upload and let the AI figure everything out in one go.” It’s going to become more fragmented, bounded, dare I say deterministic… orchestratable.
Then I told my boss, it would be better if he could frame his excitement around these future use cases… so we can skip the kool-aid stage and get right into the good stuff.
He agreed, until about a week passed. Then it was AI hype again.
The 3rd or 4th “industry expert” tells them that things are “moving fast” and things that were impossible months ago are now reality. It’s designed to make them distrust their own subject-matter experts. They thing, ohh POTV, they’re just not educated and up to speed.
Yeah. Local LLM stuff is great when you want to shove a huge pile of documentation into a model trainer and make a more intelligent search. Two of my vendors have implemented it, and it’s more useful than a traditional indexing search tool, though you do have to verify the results (which is not much more effort since with a search you’d have to skim the document to find the info it matched anyway).
But for general “do everything” tool, yeah no. It can’t read and understand your entire database, codebase, business process, etc.
Honestly, I’ve had a rather interesting experience with AI. I was very adverse to LLM usage at first. Later I sort of figured out that I was more adverse to the energy around AI than I am AI itself.
I knew the models sucked at large tasks. Trying to get an edge on the matter though, I started asking myself, how can I get the model to perform better? I figured I could pass over the AI hate stage and get right into the AI professional stage… at least a head start.
So I began experimenting with local LLMs, LLM harnesses, and various governance tools like
jai. I decided against Claude Code and Cortex because they’re provider specific — instead using OpenCode so that I can use whichever model I desire. Then I began building out a SKILL.md repository for tightly scoped tasks likechange-review,security-analysis,refactor,architecture-review,grill-me,feature-design, …I’m still thinking through some of the project needs. I want something that lets an agent work, while treating the agent as a kind of helpful adversary. You should be able to configure workloads that designate models, context, available tooling, skills, permissions, session length, inference level, acceptance criteria, and human-review stages. It would also allow for session switching, model switching, agent deliverable handoff to another agent, … not to mention, your VCS should know and respond appropriately if an agent ever pushes code. Don’t trust it by default.
These workloads should be version controllable, benchmarked, …
Anyway, a lot of that is speculative. Just where I’m at now, controlling context and skills manually, I’m already seeing much better results.
And no, I don’t have the AI do everything. I just find smarter ways to decompose “everything” into much smaller tasks that are easier to review and scrutinize.
But also, I push for local model usage in my organization. I don’t want my success to mean success for the AI companies. Fuck the AI companies.
I was forced to dogfood it. I found that for my specific needs, it made me super productive. I generally make Claude write Ansible jobs, I store all my secrets in a vault that it never gets access to.
It can do tremendous amounts of work at my command in relative safety as long as i provide it protected tools.
Now, that said, I burn a hell of a lot of tokens moving at that speed. When the ass falls out of the market, i’ll still have all the ancible stuff I can reuse.
Neither Claude code neither codex is actually vendor specific, they just don’t tell you that you can config other providers, including local
However opencode is pretty nice too, so if you like it, use that. I personally find that opencode with GLM 5.2 or Kimi K2.7 isn’t actually that great, it’ll hallucinate more than Claude code or Codex with their respective first party models. I think it’s the models themselves rather than opencode itself though, as when I use GPT for planning and hand it off to deepseek flash to do the actual work, it’s more or less fine.
I suspect behind the scenes, the first parties are sending your requests to multiple targets and sending you back quorum.
also the environmental damage, noise pollution,etc its causing that the dot com dint cause.
yep. these mba types have gutted half of id, and are changing id - ID - to unreal engine projects.
fucking hell
That’s sacrilege.
true. and you know who has really detailed art of sacrificial altars? id. get the OG’s back together!
Except this time they’ll have a hard time blaming the devs and other workers.
I mean they’ll sneak around it, but maybe just maybe the blame will not be distributed? Lol who am I kidding.
The’re apex predators, they don’t blame anyway, just mass layoffs due to non-profitability ()
non-profitability(){ if CEO_makes_less_money_than_they_want(); return true; return true anyway because fuck the proliariat }if (bankrupt) find_new_ceo_job(parents_network);
Yeah, I’m glad you woke up there. They will always find a way to blame the developers.
they will just lay off more people to stave off the debt, and then to hold the industry to gether outsource, and hire only some senior devs while ignoring entry or juniour level people.
Ed Zitron wrote a whole thing about these people. Calls them “Business Idiots”
And we hope they go broke, dont pay their bills, cause a panic sell on AI services, which causes private equity to panic sell everything… which pops the bubble… and leads to the literal version of ‘its raining men’ on wall street as executives and profiteers have their horde of ill gotten gains evaporate in seconds.
… too much?
Damn, I was almost there. Keep going
I’m thinking the last scene in Fight Club. Yeah, that would be the one you’re looking for.
everyone will just end using deepseek, assuming they arnt charging.
These execs were the ones we were supposed to replace with AI.
- Build up reliance on AI, which looks really cheap
- You can now replace employees with AI so fire away!
- You are now completely dependent on AI and a handful of employees
- AI company sees they have you and start jacking up rates. If you could afford paying for people before then you have the $ to pay high rates.
- Company now wonders why costs are back to where they were before and the AI isn’t working out as expected.
It’s particularly funny because I’m pretty sure AI companies are still selling the service below cost to try to retain market share (and drive small competitors out of business). They just aren’t taking quite as big a loss on every token with the increased prices.
Pretty much the model for so many internet services or streaming services.
Yeah. It certainly pays off sometimes. Amazon did it. It just, y’know, also crashes and burns sometimes, and I’m not sanguine about the way this is shifting its investment money from venture capitalists to, y’know, passive index fund investors.
So, they’re earning money on token generation but not overall (including training)?
Openai had 2025 6billion in revenue and 20 billion costs on compute. So just to run the models to get 6billion they need to pay 20billion r&d and marketing etc get on top of that
I’m sure there’s a term for it but this is like when a company keeps securing funding from investors so they keep growing to try to outpace costs with the illusion that you’re profitable when in reality you’re not. Just like WeWork.
It’s just a Ponzi scheme with extra steps.
Venture capital
Private credit. Get ready for the tsunami.
Everyone is pulling out of private credit, a non-liquid market (by design); surely nothing can go wrong…
No, my understanding is that they’re bringing in revenue on token generation, but it’s exceeded by the costs of token generation (running data centers, so, electricity and cooling). They definitely want to make a profit on token generation, but they’re afraid that raising costs that high too quickly would drive customers to switch to other providers. So they’ve reduced the amount they’re subsidizing token costs, but not switched over to making a profit.
I can’t find a good citation for this, though, so it’s possible I’m mistaken. They also have huge costs associated with buying new GPUs and building new datacenters, so they’re operating at a massive loss either way, and it’s a little hard to find articles which tease apart the two aspects.
In any case, operating at a massive loss for the first few years is practically standard operating procedure in silicon valley at this point, and sometimes it eventually leads to a profitable, even wildly profitable, business (e.g. Amazon). But it does require a steady stream of investors and a steadily increasing market valuation. That’s…we’ll have to see what happens on that front.
Yeah it’s basically the enshitification model
With the quirk that the service was shit to begin with.
Maybe but it’s like crack for CEOs
It’s just newsworthy when it happens to companies.
- AI company hijacks your processes, trade secrets, and market to offer the same thing for cheaper than you can. Raises rates for competitors to cover its own token use and simultaneously drive the others out of business.
- They see people have gone to new companies thatre private unionized and value customers/employees/etc replacing them as they had done with their employees
- The company asks for them to come back to be laughed at as the people watch for them to slowly sink and be replaced with many better alternatives to take their place
- That is happening right now and we all can make it happen faster
Is this real life, or is it just fantasy?
It’s such a perfect grift
Have you heard about “Tokenmaxxing”?
Since many AI companies didn’t have a reasonable limit on the number of tokens for the amount of money you paid, companies started telling their employees to use as many tokens as possible. LLMs improve with more tokens (although there are diminishing returns).
So users tried to exploit the ‘lure offer’, and AI companies had to change the billing. It’s still below the real cost, but no longer this insanely expensive option.
Oh it was all over the tech news. Reddit was trying to guess the mystery company that got the massive bill.
The first hit was free.
Someone should remind those soggy, arrogant execs that down here in the developer trenches we survived web services, software as a service, outsourcing, and off-shoring. We’re still here after all that and we’ll still be here after AI.
Some of these people are so out of touch that they’d have to spend a decade in the trenches before they might even begin to get an inkling that something is up.
Case in point: Bezos went to space and wasn’t humbled by the overviewer effect because his ego is literally larger than the planet he lives on.
to be fair the overviewer effect has been romanticized and played up by people who literally spent their entire life training and competing for the chance at a few hours or days cumulative time in space while pretending for the deciders and teams of doctors that they arent just normal flawed people like the rest of us. astronauts basically have to buy in to the overviewer effect as one of the things that makes all their sacrifices “worth it”, and part of trying to convince themselves is convincing others that its a real thing most people will experience. its more of a placebo effect in reality, though im sure there are people who genuinely felt it. bezos just didnt have to work for it at all so he has no incentive to buy into the hype, total lack of empathy and compassion aside.
Idk, it could still be genuine. maybe I just don’t fly enough, but every time I get the chance I’m amazed that humanity managed to achieve flight.
he literally opened a champagned bottle on a recovering alcoholic(shatner) he pretends to be human.
