Sorry, the best they can do is gaslight while they pass more regressive rulings via the shadow docket.

They make far too much money to be ‘over staffed’. They are overcommitted to billionaire shareholders. They always blame a blameless entity for shitty actions. See ‘the economy’ etc. Might as well blame the weather.

They do this anyways… albeit through wage stagflation, reducing benefits, layoffs, increased contract work forces, etc. Workers have always had to fight for their livelihood.

Always start negotiations asking for (far) more than what you want!

A reasonable argument in its best case. Removing barriers for good content to flourish is a good thing. The cost for removing these barriers in this case is destroying our planet, enabling shareholders to manipulate and exploit the working class, and - when the bubble explodes - will leave the public with a huge bill. What comes after the collapse might be more sustainable and interesting.

They need to unionize if they want to see change

Governments are complicit

Mobility is not high when every other company in the market does this regularly. People that just started families, moved their lives, have healthcare needs will see significant negative impact. These actions are a direct transfer of wealth from working class people to already incomprehensibly wealthy shareholders. And what’s more the actions are designed to keep people happy with what they have and reduce wages and wage growth for those that aren’t impacted. Shareholders are incentivizing immoral acts against the working class and using tech corporations to do so.

That’s fair. I think they are trying to utilize EEE to replace search, content creation, and more - everything AI is being shoveled into. But the main goal is just to force utilization through any means necessary and establish a new market & sales model they are unable to define.

That’s ’embrace, extend, extinguish’ for you. Question is if there is a profitable model to come. The usual economies of scale don’t seem capable of adding up in this case. Even the maniacs on Wall Street are balking.

https://www.wheresyoured.at/the-subprime-ai-crisis-is-here/

It could be, but it doesn’t look promising - and the fact that it’s pretty much impossible to know what the actual costs are is, in itself, very telling.

When you use these services, the company in question then pays for access to the AI models in question, either at a per-million-token rate to an AI lab, or (in the case of Anthropic and OpenAI) whatever cloud provider is renting them the GPUs to run the models. A token is basically ¾ of a word.

As a user, you do not experience token burn, just the process of inputs and outputs. AI labs obfuscate the cost of services by using “tokens” or “messages” or 5-hour-rate limits with percentage gauges, and you, as the user, do not really know how much any of it costs. On the back end, AI startups are annihilating cash, with up until recently Anthropic allowing you to burn upwards of $8 in compute for every dollar of your subscription. OpenAI allows you to do the same, though it’s hard to gauge by how much.

Certainly part of the sales pitch. But so far it turns out humans are more efficient (cost less). I think the appeal to companies is the control (and the cost while it’s so heavily subsidized by the industry pushing it). The appeal to the major AI investors and execs is to… privatize the profits and socialize the losses. They will golden parachute themselves and leave the people with their mess.

Except it’s not profitable at all. It’s a huge bubble waiting to collapse.

Yes & they last longer