Join the discussion

Write your take first — we'll ask for email only when you're ready to publish.

  • Hacker News
  • The best use of AI is to replace CEOs, C-Suite, politicians and bureaucrats. Let them feel the heat for the first time in their life.

    Interested folks can start by putting in shareholder resolutions with the proposal and the prompts that would replace CEO. SKILLs.md?

  • Your comment is entirely emotionally driven. “These politicians! These bureaucrats!”.

    Let me guess, it just happens that the role that you work in is amongst the only that actually provide value, and everything else is just waste.

    Developers are among some of the least self-aware people ever, I swear. And I say this as a developer. The God complex instilled in techies in the ‘00s and ‘10s is unrivalled and I’m really enjoying seeing some of you being taken down a peg.

  • Feel the heat? As in, be punished? For what, exactly?
  • No the best use is to replace hacker news commentors. Let them feel the heat for the fist time in their life.

    See you can add anything there and the sentence will make sense.

    I will never vote for an AI system to actually make laws lol wtf are you even saying

  • Most of them could already retire comfortably.

    So the only potential heat is boredom.

  • So we work for the AI? AI should work for us.
  • > The next session opens with a <past_decisions> block so the Executive remembers what it recommended last month.

    This is morbidly unrealistic.

  • came here to make exactly the same comment
  • That an Executive would remember what he recommended a month ago?
  • Gotta love that they picked sonnet as default for the CEO and most execs..
  • The crux of this entire issue surrounding replacing people with agents, is that agents should pay taxes. If we're losing people that pay taxes our social safety nets will crumble. Maybe that makes the math more in favor of actually using humans too.
  • How about we start making billionaires and their companies pay taxes first?
  • Taxes can't replace people spending money and getting goods and services. Also, who said AI is getting paid well enough to afford paying taxes?
  • Doesn't this assume those people don't just find other jobs and continue to pay taxes?
  • Jeremy Rifkin already wrote about that in 1995. His predictions might have been wrong by a few decades. :-) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_End_of_Work
  • I don't think taxes are the main issue, but people losing their jobs.

    We need UBI. Taxes are still there anyway, company income/profit tax, VAT, and maybe we can have other taxes too for automatically-generate income, same as with investments/dividend/gambling tax and stuff.

  • Where do you draw the line to define an "agent" that should pay taxes? Many jobs once done entirely by humans have been replaced by software or mechanical automation long before AI came along. The issue of eroding social safety nets due to declining income tax revenue can be solved in a much more straightforward manner that doesn't require complex AI tax schemes.
  • Here's a wild idea: about the CEO and shareholders being properly taxed, instead? Every job being replaced by AI is with the purpose of making more money for the CEO and shareholders, right? So, tax them more. It would solve SO MANY issues
  • I'm fully in favor of a social safety net (a proper UBI even), but the tax system should tax what we don't want / keep within bounds, and I think in general we want more automation and more free time. So we should tax resource consumption. Short time, this might turn out the same (i.e. whether to tax agents through electricity consumption or agents directly might not make much of a difference) but I think long term this would align incentives across a few dimensions very well.
  • What does a CEO(and other managers) do really?

    Sometimes the claim is "set vision" - which AI can extract from the collective.

    Someimes the claim is to prioritize the work (with bias), AI can extract that from the collective too, right?

    Making resources available to the team? AI.

    Coordinating between teams? AI.

    Can the AI do this in a more un-biased way? Can it refine collective intelligence and desire into objective goals?

    More than a software factory id love to see a manager-factory.

    One thing, AI cannot do (yet) is bring the network. Like when you hire folk from Booth or Sloan so you can sell to places that hired Booth and Sloan grads.

  • In the current legal framework, AI can't be held accountable, a human being is required.

    That is what the CEO is for – to be on the receiving end of beatings and flogging if the business they are at the masthead of effs something up.

  • Good ones actually are quite aware of the industry, connect the dots and setup the company to be sustainable, growing and ready when its time to be ready.

    Like investing in a prototype which solves industry issues the CEO understood.

    Same as the CTO just that the CTOs focus is doing the same thing with technology. Like in an org with a lot of 'AI? who cares" saying and seeing the future of it and intorducing it in time and not until everyone else already did it.

    Defining core principles like the tech stack, making the decision to keep the current setup or migrating to something 'new' but better in longterm (like migrating from or to kubernetes)

  • > What does a CEO(and other managers) do really?

    The answer is to be responsible to the business. The buck stops at the CEO. Therefore, their responsibilities are technically everything in the entire company. And I think many people who have only worked for other people underestimate how valuable that responsibility is.

  • > Sometimes the claim is "set vision" - which AI can extract from the collective.

    To be an effective CEO, you have to make judgement calls that the collective can’t always have wisdom and context on, is confidential, or requires fast decision making during which there are interactive discussions or negotiations!

  • In companies large enough to have a board, the CEO's job is to manage relationships with customers, vendors, and wall street. If his company is big enough, he'll need to manage relationships with the government too. In fact, among founders whose business became big, the number one complaint you hear is how little of their busy day is spent on their actual product anymore.

    AI is not very good at forming and building human relationships.

  • At my current job, a 10 person startup, the CEOs job is to generate leads, talk to potential customers, and close deals. He, along with the other founders, shape what we work on based on what he thinks it’s possible for us to sell. He’s essential to the business.

    At my previous 50k person company I never talked to anyone within 4 levels of the CEO and thought he was useless. But realistically he probably had a somewhat similar job - talking with the board, talking with politicians, and talking with the CEOs of other companies in the effort to lower costs (tax breaks, partnerships, etc) and generate sales (contracts, partnerships, etc).

  • To paraphrase Andy Grove:

    > The job of an executive is: to define and enforce culture and values for their whole organization, and to ratify good decisions.

    (And that's the whole list! Nowhere do you find set tasks or make decisions)

    To me, that means that they're still pretty essential - on both fronts, AI needs values and AI needs a system that can tell whether decisions are good or not.

  • > What does a CEO(and other managers) do really?

    Be friends with the board. Negotiate high pay and benefits (for themselves), and a golden parachute in case things go south (which they do most often). Take credit for things that were going to happen anyways. Blame xyz for things that didn't work out.

    These are all impossible tasks for AI. AI can't play golf.

  • It would be hilarious if the AI CEO also fired all the developers
  • Since LLMs tend to paraphrase what others have published about similar circumstances, chances are pretty high it will.
    by tgv