[tracerbulletx]

I am very tired of seeing every random person's speculation (framed as real insight) on what's going to happen as they try to signify that they are super involved in AI and super on top of it and therefore still worthy of value and importance in the economy.

[torginus]

One thing I found out from my years of commenting on the internet, is as long as what you say sounds plausible and you state it with absolute conviction and authority, you can get your 15 minutes of fame as the world's foremost expert on any given topic.

[Lramseyer]

You have to understand the people in the article are execs from the chip EDA (Electronic Design Automation) industry. It's full of dinosaurs who have resisted innovation for the past 30 years. Of course they're going to be blowing hot air about how they're "embracing AI". It's a threat to their business model.

I'm a little biased though since I work in chip design and I maintain an open source EDA project.

I agree with their take for the most part, but it's really nothing insightful or different than what people have been saying for a while now.

[reactordev]

It’s in software too. Old guard leadership wanting “AI” as a badge but not knowing what to do with it. They are just sprinkling it into their processes and exfiltrating data while engineers continue to make a mess of things.

Unlike real AI projects that utilize it for workflows, or generating models that do a thing. Nope, they are taking a Jira ticket, asking copilot, reviewing copilot, responding to Jira ticket. They’re all ripe for automation.

[tylerflick]

Wake me when the auto-router works.

[estimator7292]

In my humble opinion, every corporate EDA exec can suck farts through a bendy straw. Altium has to be some of the worst software in existence.

[volkk]

the wonderful modern world of "everyone must build their personal brand"

[pousada]

The worst thing is that it works.

(As a musician) i never invested in a personal brand or taking part in the social media rat race and figured I concentrate on the art / craft over meaningless performance online.

Well guess who is getting 0 gigs now because “too few followers/visibility” (or maybe my music just sucks who knows …)

[imiric]

Agreed, but I'd add tech influencers and celebrities to the top of that list, especially those invested in the "AI" hype cycle. At least the perspective of a random engineer is less likely to be tainted by their brand and agenda, and more likely to have genuine insight.

[n2d4]

I think I'm the opposite! The key is to ignore any language that sounds too determined and treat it as an opinion piece on what could happen. There's no way of knowing what will, but I find the theories very interesting.

[isodev]

To me the post reads more like “we couldn’t convince current engineers to adopt LLMs so we’re going to embed it into the curriculum so future engineers are made to believe it’s the way to do things”

[DiscourseFan]

Yeah if you actually work in AI you usually can’t say much at all about what’s going on.

[CuriouslyC]

Sadly this is more a statement about human irrationality than any of the technology involved.

[mnky9800n]

What would you like to hear from random people?

[jrowen]

Also, can we just STFU about AI and jobs already? We've long since passed the point where there was a meaningful amount of work to be done for every adult. The number of "jobs" available is now merely a function of who controls the massive stockpiles of accumulated resources and how they choose to dole them out. Attack that, not the technology.

[jongjong]

Great point. The people who popularized 'the end of history' were right about it from the PoV of innovation benefiting humans. It's been marginal gains since. Any appearance of significant gains (in the eyes of a minority of powerful people) has been the result of concentration in fewer hands (zero-sum game).

The focus of politics after the 90s should have shifted to facilitating competition to equalize distribution of existing wealth and should have promoted competition of ideas, but instead, the governments of the world got together and enacted policies which would suppress competition, at the highest scale imaginable. What they did was much worse than doing nothing.

Now, the closest solution we can aim for (IMO) is UBI. It's a late solution because a lot of people's lives have already been ruined through no fault of their own. On the plus side it made other people much more resilient, but if we keep going down this path, there is nothing more to learn; only serves to reinforce the existing idea that everything is a scam. This is bound to affect people's behaviors in terrible ways.

Imagine a dystopian future where the system spends a huge amount of resources first financially oppressing people to the point of insanity, then monitoring and controlling them to try to get them to avoid doing harm... When the system could just have given them (less) money and avoided this downward spiral into insanity to begin with and then you wouldn't even need to monitor them because they would be allowed to survive whilst being their own sane, good-natured self. We have to course-correct and are approaching a point of no return when the resentment becomes severe and permanent. Nobody can survive in a world where the majority of people are insane.

[FloorEgg]

> Also, can we just STFU about AI and jobs already?

Phew, yes I'm with you...

> We've long since passed the point where there was a meaningful amount of work to be done for every adult.

Have we? It feels like a lot of stuff in my life is unnecessarily expensive or hard to afford.

> The number of "jobs" available is now merely a function of who controls the massive stockpiles of accumulated resources and how they choose to dole them out.

Do you mean that it has nothing to do with how the average person decides to spend their money?

> Attack that, not the technology.

How? What are you proposing exactly?

[Avicebron]

"Temporarily embarrassed AI hypebeasts"

[loughnane]

well said.

[jstummbillig]

Then don't.