AI didn't cause the tech jobs bust, but it explains why there's no recovery
j / k
|
Down or up a comment |
h / l
|
Previous or next link |
?
|
This help |
I have no dog in this fight, but they didn't say "race", they said "ethnic cartel". Using race and ethnicity interchangeably seems as lossy in terms of information as the concept of race was invented to be
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23697083
Almost all of these jobs (onshore/offshore) are bullshit jobs. I've been asking people for ~25 years: what do people offshore do? Nobody knows. Jobs are created, people are hired, after that ...
Now, the new craze is GCCs (Global Capability Centers).
- AI has made, at the very least, the illusion of not needing software engineers anymore
- The cost of money is both going up in the sense of interest rates, but also in the general availability of it / opportunity cost due to inflation eating into dispoable / investable income and also because mag10 cashflow is all going into more physical stuff like Datacenters and gpus.
- The investing environment is unstable, iran instability, 1000s of tariff changes in a couple years, US demand for loans (to fund their own interest payments)
A different story being told is that the industry over hired during COVID and lockdowns, then over corrected with Ai, and now we are returning to normal levels.
AI is providing a cover story for incompetent executive management decisions at firms worth trillions of dollars. I'm not saying anything about how useful or not useful AI will actually be, but it's clear that these geniuses funded a bunch of dead-end projects chasing fool's gold, and then they needed to free up capital to get in on what could be an actual gold rush.
But it looks to me that the layoffs are due to AI but not because the positions are replaced, because capital is flowing to hardware instead of new hires. The growth engine of the tech industry used to be people, now it is clearly gpus. If you have 10 billion in the bank you are not going to aggressively expand your workforce, you are going to build datacenters.
The entitlements might not have been so bad if exponential population growth could last forever, but even a middleschooler knows that has to end eventually.
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/IHLIDXUSTPSOFTDEVE
But for the love of Linus please remove that background animation or give me the possibility to disable it, it's distracting.
The writing style is very AIy, as a feedback.
https://layoffs.fyi/ai-layoffs/
No one is going to say "we over hired because we had cheap capital and got careless and over-ambitious" or "we were overstaffed because we were inefficient".
I have yet to see a big corp using AI to reduce work and therefore not need the employees. It's an endless pit of work generation!
However it's now an excuse to cut head count because of executive poor decisions, and a poor economy due to having bad leadership.
Either way, I think the category still has a non-zero amount of meaning.
If your primary product is computer hardware or software and you serve more than one market, you’re probably in the tech sector.
E.g., Epic Systems is not a tech company, even though all they do is make software, since they only serve the healthcare industry.
We can’t say the same thing about Apple even though they make healthcare products and services.
Even companies like Epic Systems or other customer-specific tech industries like FinTech can get lumped in the tech industry umbrella in the right context, and I generally think that makes sense.
Developer is where I disagree with you more strongly. It is much more straightforward as “a single kind of job” in the sense that almost all of them are affected in the same ways by AI. It doesn’t really matter what company you work for: if you’re a Java developer and AI is increasing output/decreasing hours, that affects your employment status regardless of your industry.
Even if you have outliers the category still has value.
Essentially think if we start thinking about “backend versus frontend” or getting down to distinctions between individual programming languages we are almost too dismissive of the ways in which these jobs are essentially exactly the same
But, these are job categories, not separate industries. I think the industry category would be more about the employer or the product category, not the individual job codes of their employees..?
what we see could be an illusion and next 3 months will be a test of whether it can stand reality check.
>youngest workers most affected
Time to resort to agemaxxing.
Seems like there's still plenty of demand for regular dev work. AI is often just a buzzword in job descriptions.
Curious, did you look at freelance/contract work too, or just full-time jobs?