Technology

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

1. Build up reliance on AI, which looks really cheap
2. You can now replace employees with AI so fire away!
3. You are now completely dependent on AI and a handful of employees
4. 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.
5. Company now wonders why costs are back to where they were before and the AI isn't working out as expected.

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.

I swear, execs are some of the most gullible people on earth. I know some of them, and none of them are very bright, just very greedy.

Just wait until all the technical debt has to be paid as well.

Anyone who fell for this grift deserves it and much worse.

People, usually who have never done the job, still love to argue that it can compete with software devs and infra engineers.

The sad part they don't see (or maybe care about) is while it can't currently (and absolutely not llms) they're pushing a narrative that we should automate everyone and everything which is dangerous and moronic.

And if we had strong labour relationships, we'd make them fucking pay for having attempted to destroy our lives for profit.

I replaced all my software team with agents which can work 24h a day on the product and now none of the software works and I'm out $600000 waaaaaa

• Exec

You'd think the cocaine-snorting classes would understand that only the first hit's free.

Here is how it has gone down for a few companies I have visibillity on:

• Investors with enough stock to have influence demand the company use AI and cut staff
• remaining ataff struggles to fit AI into their now bloated workload
• quality slips and stumbles. a few employees are able to make the transition and cause huge AI bills while attempting to cover the workload
• everyone gets upset and nothing gets done well

It looks like investors who have also invested in AI are trying to push its use and it is stumbling all over the place. If a company cant adapt it is basically stripped for parts and sold off to companies that are handling it better.

It's funny because they do this to other people; they just never thought it'd happen to them. FAFO 🫡

SMH Did they really think all these investors just wanted to burn 9-figure sums without any serious return?

i am saying this for about a year now: Altman wants to rule the world.

CEO "What, you screwed me over, too? Me?!?"

It's like these assholes have never heard the phrase "too good to be true".

If you've ever spent 10 minutes using an AI agent, you'd know that there's no way to predict how many tokens it's going to use before you give it a task. It can be $0.20 worth sometimes or $20 other times. Or anything, really.

It's only after watching it churn away for a few minutes that you can assume it's gotten stuck and have the option of pulling the plug before the bill gets run up too high. But you need to watch it like a hawk and you need to be the one paying the bill otherwise you're not going to care (e.g. workers using AI at work aren't paying for it, their company is).

Taken in aggregate across a month, that unpredictability might average out or it might explode.

And the media will keep on shamelessly calling them "job creators".

Hopefully some day the average voter will see through that shit.

I will never understand how is it that such idiots repeatedly make it to the top.

"The man selling AI lied so that I would buy AI. :("

This reporting is basically dishonest. The execs are not confused. They knew this was likely to occur, because we all told them so.

Now, you can argue that they hoped otherwise, that they were being ridiculously optimistic. But to argue that they didn't expect it is simply unbelievable.

Here's a real a cost saving prompt:

"Translate the contents of every single document in our databases into as many languages (including dead and constructed fictional languages) as possible."

Now you can fire the one Hispanic guy you hired because you assumed he could speak Hindi.

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

Should post this under \leopardsatemyface