zlacker

>>fancy_+(OP)
The strangest part to me about the current trends: why do all these business leaders all do the same things at the same time? E.g. Layoffs + micromanagement + cost focus etc... Is this truly about macroeconomic forces that every business is responding to? Or is it just following the latest fad?

There seems to be significant opportunity to zig as others zag. Imagine the Intel letter saying "we are going to take advantage of the current hiring environment to scoop up talent, and push forward on initiatives."

>>johnga+ec
It's almost as if CEOs aren't really that smart or creative, got to their position through mostly politics, and look externally for clues about what to do.

>>ryandr+bd
CEOs like to brag about how AI is going to replace skilled workers. Yet, it should be obvious to anyone having experience in LLMs that top executives are the jobs that are most likely replaceable by AI.

Just keep smooth talking everyone into cost reductions and make arbitrary decisions to make it feel like you're actually in charge.

>>thbb12+je
Wouldn't that be funny to see an AI bot replace the CEO of something like Boeing, and then see the company turn around in positive moves? Feed an LLM all of the business data that a CEO would have and then ask it to make the same decisions the CEO would be expected to make. Since layoffs would be the trend online for LLMs to train on, would they come up with slop that looks like they too follow the trends? If companies are willing to replace dev with AI, why are boards not looking at all of the C-suite offices with the same mindset?

>>dylan6+7f
Same with the Federal Reserve. Why not continuously adjust interest rates, instead of all of Wall Street agonizing over each decision made?

>>DaveZa+7h
Wallstreet would be screwed by this. You can't take away the gambling aspect and big wins because then you are left with a pre-80s style market where dividends and steady income matter over 'line goes up next quarter'. The current market would HATE that.

>>_DeadF+ec2
couldn't agree more.

Many economists point out that the Fed's policies serve the 1% above all.

Heck you can get a Nobel Prize based on your Fed chairmanship, then tank the economy.

One pundit observes that the Fed is an example of "burn the village to save the village" as (rarely) an underemployed firefighter-turned-arsonist will do. Extreme perspective for sure.

In the era of Big Data, can't real-time data and policy co-exist?