←back to thread

AI adoption linked to 13% decline in jobs for young U.S. workers: study

(www.cnbc.com)
440 points pseudolus | 3 comments | 28 Aug 25 14:13 UTC | HN request time: 0.218s | source
Show context
bilsbie ◴[28 Aug 25 21:47 UTC] No.45057433[source]▶
AI is the popular cover excuse for layoffs.

I can’t think of a single job that modern AI could easily replace.

replies(12): >>45057452 #>>45057453 #>>45058195 #>>45060286 #>>45060360 #>>45060394 #>>45060417 #>>45060461 #>>45060742 #>>45061744 #>>45062263 #>>45062436 #
laughing_man ◴[29 Aug 25 05:06 UTC] No.45060417[source]▶
It doesn't have to replace people on a one-for-one basis to cause job losses. Let's say LLMs make your developers 50% more efficient. Doesn't it stand to reason you can lay off the lowest performing 33% and get the same amount (or more) of work?
replies(4): >>45060625 #>>45060825 #>>45062045 #>>45062412 #
1. visarga ◴[29 Aug 25 06:21 UTC] No.45060825[source]▶
No, it does not stand, because you think linearly. Companies can't simply drop 33% of employees because there is competition. If competition uses both humans and AI they will get more value from both. No AI has sufficient autonomy or capability to be held accountable for its mistakes.

There is less upswing in reducing costs than in increasing profits. Companies want to increase profits actually, not just reduce costs which will be eaten away by competition. In a world where everyone has the same AIs, human still make the difference.

replies(2): >>45061924 #>>45068526 #
2. NaomiLehman ◴[29 Aug 25 09:19 UTC] No.45061924[source]▶
Think about Meta. A simple example is Metaverse. Mistakes and competition? Then, look at their market capitalization over the last three years.
3. laughing_man ◴[29 Aug 25 19:43 UTC] No.45068526[source]▶
You're assuming everyone can compete on service alone, and that's just not the case. If the quality of the product is good enough, price becomes the more important metric.