They could save millions by that move
CEOs do less for a company than the average worker. A company can run for a long time without a CEO, but get rid of your finance team, IT team, production team, or customer service team (all of which are much cheaper than a single CEO) and see how long your company lasts.
My theory is short term decisions are generally made much further down the decision hierarchy and the CEOs main job SHOULD be more long term vision and planning. Most companies, except for a few, make decisions based on what makes them the most money in the shortest term so in effect the CEO doesn’t do shit and likely could be replaced by an AI.
There are companies that work that way. In my experience, they either meddle in lower-level affairs themselves or command their department heads to do so on their behalf.
Part of that I AM THE VISION is super easy to corrupt into WHY ARE YOU SO SHORT SIGHTED IN THE DAY-TO-DAY
My last couple CEO’s have been S tier. They went out, brought in the investors, distributed the money downhill reasonably well.
I’ve worked with plenty who couldn’t keep their dicks out of the company minutiae, metaphorically or physically.
When somebody insists that the food they made is good and that you should have some but refuses to eat it themselves, you know that they’re lying and the food is shit.
oh hey, you were at the big family dinner last night.
it was my mother’s turn to cook and she didn’t eat anything. there was enough food, just it was really, really bad.
pro cooking tip for all y’all out there: never, and i do mean never, go into your spice cabinet and just grab seven random spices to season a dish. actually think about what you’re cooking.
she made rice with garam masala and cream of tartar. like what the fuck.
It could’ve worked, but one doesn’t do such risky culinary experimentations when cooking for others.
or ASKS them whether they want to be a test mouth. doesn’t make it the whole damn meal.
Kinda how anything with “gourmet” on it is shit?
they’re typically sociopaths, narcissists, or both. other people hardly exist
And their ai says they’re irreplaceable geniuses
GIGO or something
Lots of people are saying that AI isn’t that good, and that’s absolutely true.
To your question though, AI has been doing better at running companies than CEOs.
Who would’ve thought that the machine that’s great at making shit up and running with it would be good at the “job” of people that make shit up and run with it.
While AI is not good, people seem to have forgotten the fact that CEOs are also not good…and are complete idiots.
It’s a great demonstration of how what modern CEOs are really good at is bullshit rather than management.
I keep reading “AI is better at doing … than the human” but I went to code a simple HTML app and that fucker did a horrible job. I kept having to explain the same thing over and over and it kept giving me the wrong code. The company asked us to use this shit and I thought it would save me time… it took longer than if I just coded myself. For now my experience is not good
My exact experience as well. Tasks that need precision and accuracy it does not do well. We have to babysit it.
Why would a CEO choose to stop receiving a paycheck?
Same reason religions demand you tithe but refuse to pay taxes, even though they don’t deny Christ said, “render unto Caesar what is Caesar’s, and render unto God what is God’s,” which is to say, fulfil your obligations to the government before fulfilling your obligations to God.
jesus confirmed shitlib
Ok, but Ai, tho…
That’s a wild understanding but you do you
What part do you think is wild exactly? The rendering or the same reason bit?
That’s not what that verse means. It means leave government stuff to government and God centered stuff to God. He was differentiating between God and the government.
That’s certainly not a “wild understanding” as the other commenter describes it. I’ve heard that interpretation taught since I was a child to mean pay your taxes. And what are these religions telling you not to pay your taxes?
I think the use of “before” is debateable.
I never used that word.
… But OP certainly did
I love how there are so many meanings, and everyone believes theirs is the right one.
My dissertation chair wrote a book partially on this subject. He pointed out that the Qamranites (like John the Baptist) preached that everything in the holy land belonged to god and nothing belonged to caesar. In that vein, “render unto caesar that which is caesar’s and render unto god that which is god’s” translates to “fuck caesar”. Personally I have no dog in the fight, but this interpretation is a lot more fun.
Ha I love it, ill choose this one.
A true biblical scholar… He just missed quite a few verses lmao
I look up the most widely accepted meaning by theologians.
Cause LLMs can’t yet be nepo babies
The Master’s Tools Will Never Dismantle the Master’s House.
Why not? “Enoch has made them, now Enoch shall break them.”
Those poor tools sound like they don’t get used very often.
I think you already know the answer because you asked the question.
The CEOs are the ones trying to convince everyone (investors really) that AI can replace humans to try to increase profits. That’s it.
LLMs/AI are fantastic tools, but that’s all they are. Just tools. The CEOs are selling the AI revolution fantasy.
They’re an entertainment technology, not a revolutionary business technology as they claim, so their maximum value is constrained by the boundaries of the entertainment market rather than being a significant fraction of the World’s Economy: basically they’ll at best have a Social Media Tech-sized Economic footprint, not an Industrial Revolution one.
However, that shit was sold as an Economic Revolution and the investment footprint is proportional to that prospect not to a “this will be as big as Social Media” one, and by now all that’s left to try and keep that massive block of investment from crushing on the far too narrow columnn or returns, is ever more desperate spinning of hopes and dreams fables.
If AI was anywhere close to that good, they wouldn’t be encouraging the masses to use it, they would be hoarding access for their own benefit.
Been saying this for a year now. If they replace us, why not replace them? I was personally told it’s because the connections a CEO has. Well, if my CEO had connections my ESPP wouldn’t have lost 40% since buying it 2 years ago.
Because it’s not that good.
AI is an excuse. AI is an excuse to: reduce staff, hoard resources, sustain dependency on a rental economy, stifle creatives (who might have subversive messages!), surveil the world quickly by summarizing huge amounts of cloud stored files, create false evidence, cast doubt on real evidence, fleece investors, and finally, convince everyone you’re “the NEXT Bill Gates/tech messiah”
Why couldn’t these fuckers just sink their money into fusion instead? We need that way more badly.
Because you can’t scapegoat an AI when the business does something illegal.
Because the CEOs are the ones making the decisions
