The AI is taking our jerbs thread

www.forbes.com

Is AI The Scapegoat Employers Use To Explain Technology Layoffs?

AI has not yet replaced actual jobs at scale. It is potentially a cover for cost cutting but might well laid to mass layoffs in the future.
www.forbes.com www.forbes.com

great article here. As i mentioned several times, AI is used as the official cover reasons for layoffs when there are many other factors involved with little evidence AI is itself is having the supposed impact.
 
We have an instance of copilot (now running GPT5) at work which is internally facing i.e. you can share work related data safely it doesn't go outside of our ecosystem. Then there's a switch to use "web" but you can't upload docs to it or link to SharePoint/OneDrive.

In all honesty it's been really useful to summarise meetings, enhance documents and reduce duplication of efforts but importantly find information and enhance the work we do.

That said I do worry about young people that rely on it more than actually learning core information and skills.
 
Freefaller said:
We have an instance of copilot (now running GPT5) at work which is internally facing i.e. you can share work related data safely it doesn't go outside of our ecosystem. Then there's a switch to use "web" but you can't upload docs to it or link to SharePoint/OneDrive.

In all honesty it's been really useful to summarise meetings, enhance documents and reduce duplication of efforts but importantly find information and enhance the work we do.

That said I do worry about young people that rely on it more than actually learning core information and skills.
Click to expand...
We have the same.set up.where I work. I find it really useful to summerise notes or meeting documents. It is good for creating training material and drafting replies.for things.

It's as.good as the instructions and clear directions you can provide it

It's a time saver in its current form and makes my team.more efficient.

Although we did have a trainer from.microsoft come and run some business wide sessions. Part of his training was to say please and thank you to co-pilot as it produced better results!
 
We've the same internal co pilot and same experience. its ok at basic office stuff.

Personally I don't think much of it, I think once you deep dive on something you find it missing things. Trying to use to find documents across the intranet is useless. It gets partial results which look impressive until you do a proper search and start testing the results. If your organisation has a poor naming habits it really struggles with it.

You can use it to throw documents and reports together but you'd have go fix it afterwards. I can see people who don't check things properly causing problems for themselves with it.

Maybe it will get better. I think it will lead creation of very poor reports and documents at least in the beginning.
 
OspreyO said:
You can use it to throw documents and reports together but you'd have go fix it afterwards. I can see people who don't check things properly causing problems for themselves with it.

Maybe it will get better. I think it will lead creation of very poor reports and documents at least in the bebeginning.
Click to expand...
I agree re poor.output. I can clearly see when people.have used it to draft an email. There tend to be peculiar sets of.words used that the person that sent it wouldn't ever use and they haven't bothered to read it

Things.like 'don't think all.the effort and hardwork you do doesn't go unnoticed'

Ive seen this used in various well done emails to people from different people

Which feels a bit disingenuous, if youre going to thank or praise someone, atleast bother to.domit.yourself...
 
The value is definitely as an assistant but rarely a replacement. The fact that you can't trust the output is always going to be its biggest issue - if it can't reliably summarise an email thread, how can you expect it to replace a person doing even mildly complex work.
 
Freefaller said:
We have an instance of copilot (now running GPT5) at work which is internally facing i.e. you can share work related data safely it doesn't go outside of our ecosystem. Then there's a switch to use "web" but you can't upload docs to it or link to SharePoint/OneDrive.

In all honesty it's been really useful to summarise meetings, enhance documents and reduce duplication of efforts but importantly find information and enhance the work we do.

That said I do worry about young people that rely on it more than actually learning core information and skills.
Click to expand...
We have the same setup at work. All I can say is that it's a long way before it actually replaces us... It's just a tool right now
 
D.P. said:
www.forbes.com

Is AI The Scapegoat Employers Use To Explain Technology Layoffs?

AI has not yet replaced actual jobs at scale. It is potentially a cover for cost cutting but might well laid to mass layoffs in the future.
www.forbes.com www.forbes.com

great article here. As i mentioned several times, AI is used as the official cover reasons for layoffs when there are many other factors involved with little evidence AI is itself is having the supposed impact.
Click to expand...

I think everyone knows deep down companies are using AI as an excuse to layoff people.

Freefaller said:
We have an instance of copilot (now running GPT5) at work which is internally facing i.e. you can share work related data safely it doesn't go outside of our ecosystem. Then there's a switch to use "web" but you can't upload docs to it or link to SharePoint/OneDrive.

In all honesty it's been really useful to summarise meetings, enhance documents and reduce duplication of efforts but importantly find information and enhance the work we do.

That said I do worry about young people that rely on it more than actually learning core information and skills.
Click to expand...

We did the same and our copilot usage dropped to massively. Our dev team complained that its useless for them now. So we are reviewing our licenses and will be removing it from users who stopped using it.

I wouldn't worry about young people that rely on it more than actually learning core information and skills. Nobody cares anymore how you get the information they just want the information ASAP and to deliver the results.
 
Last edited:
malachi said:
I think everyone knows deep down companies are using AI as an excuse to layoff people.



We did the same and our copilot usage dropped to massively. Our dev team complained that its useless for them now. So we are reviewing our licenses and will be removing it from users who stopped using it.

I wouldn't worry about young people that rely on it more than actually learning core information and skills. Nobody cares anymore how you get the information they just want the information ASAP and to deliver the results.
Click to expand...
I think knowing things and being able to know stuff without having to look it up constantly is still valuable. But I guess the reality is that people will still look it up and check. I suppose if you know what you're checking that's the core skill, understanding the fundamentals of your job, but that's sort of the thing I'm hinting at, I did a lot of work with young engineers who relied on the internet and now leaning on AI a lot rather than giving it a go first.

That said I suppose it's about productivity, but I think companies also have a responsibility to ensure the skills are passed down and forcing the workforce to actually learn and do things long hand isn't a bad thing. But perhaps I'm a bit old fashioned.
 
malachi said:
I think everyone knows deep down companies are using AI as an excuse to layoff people.



We did the same and our copilot usage dropped to massively. Our dev team complained that its useless for them now. So we are reviewing our licenses and will be removing it from users who stopped using it.

I wouldn't worry about young people that rely on it more than actually learning core information and skills. Nobody cares anymore how you get the information they just want the information ASAP and to deliver the results.
Click to expand...
They will care if the info a junior dev uses has bugs and they are required to fix it manually...
Or requirements change and it needs tweaking
 
Freefaller said:
That said I suppose it's about productivity, but I think companies also have a responsibility to ensure the skills are passed down and forcing the workforce to actually learn and do things long hand isn't a bad thing. But perhaps I'm a bit old fashioned.
Click to expand...
jonneymendoza said:
They will care if the info a junior dev uses has bugs and they are required to fix it manually...
Or requirements change and it needs tweaking
Click to expand...

Problem is, companies dont training anyone anymore. Many see it as an waste of time and resources.

Expect you to know how to fix the problem, no matter what tools you use. This is where AI kicks in.
 
malachi said:
This is where AI kicks in.
Click to expand...
Except it doesn't, at least for people who have experience with it. The tools lack understanding, so you still need people/to teach people to guide these things.

Training is often an afterthought for companies though, so they'll think of this as a quick fix until it starts going wrong.
 
LostCorpse said:
i thought this might be of interest and counter

Amazon cloud chief says replacing junior employees with AI is 'one of the dumbest things I've ever heard​

Click to expand...
Because it is absolutely beyond moronic,

Anyone who thinks chatGPT can do all the things a junior does is stupid. I was hired not long ago as a junior, there is a lot more to the job than just writing lines of code lol.

Why does anyone think what some AI CEO says is trustable at all? Of course they are going to say it's wonderful..... pump share prices.
 
Mesai said:
Except it doesn't, at least for people who have experience with it. The tools lack understanding, so you still need people/to teach people to guide these things.
Click to expand...

Yes, just like people :cry:

We have all sat in that class in school to find out later on in life what they taught us was totally wrong. But at the time, we had no choice but to trust what they taught and no one else was there to guide the teacher.

AI is no different for learning skills.
 
Last edited:
malachi said:
Yes, just like people :cry:

We have all sat in that class in school to find out later on in life what they taught us was totally wrong. But at the time, we had no choice but to trust what they taught and no one else was there to guide the teacher.

AI is no different for learning skills.
Click to expand...
Yea, in school they teach you to regurgitate facts, same as LLMs, but then you gain experience and broader context to things around you which helps you shape that information into something fit for purpose.

LLMs can do that to some extent by providing additional context to guide it down the right path, but it's not the same as actually understanding or learning beyond the raw facts.
 
Screenshot-20250824-202711.png


Lol nope.

The guy was about 4ft tall or something, he was exceptional short.

It's getting mixed up with Basketball player of the same name.

So no, not worried lol.
 
Interesting that ChatGPT gave an incorrect summary of me - it passes the buck for the incorrect information to sites it's using but I've not give my permission for them to use my data (unless this has been in the LinkedIn as 'partners' which then means they're leaking my data to make money from it).

I've approached the company (US company) and indicated that chatgpt has provided incorrect information from their site and that they should remove my information. They've indicated they will remove it in 72 hours. The company in question basically maps companies and their employees to show the relationships between people in each company, however given they're scraping information the information is four years out of date and therefore incorrect.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom