Comment on Return to office propaganda floating around LinkedIn
sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 days ago
Well ok then, in their own words, managers are incompotent morons who lack object permanence and have no idea how to gauge the usefulness or productivity or worth of any employee… without being able to invade their personal space and randomly question them.
Replace them with LLMs, LLMs would do a better job, these people don’t deserve to be paid anything.
Well ok then, in their own words, managers are incompotent morons who lack object permanence and have no idea how to gauge the usefulness or productivity or worth of any employee… without being able to invade their personal space and randomly question them.
Uhhhh… yeah? Have you never had a job before? XD
Half this thread is delusional raging against uncomfortable truths. Just because you dislike the reality before you isn’t a reason to pretend it doesn’t exist.!
… Your comment doesn’t make any sense.
You act as if its very obvious that managers are btoadly like this. Yes, ok, we agree on that.
But, if you think these are real behaviors from many managers… then raging against them is not delusional.
Also… as opposed to only raging… I proposed a practical plan of action… replace these idiot managers with LLMs. This is essentially the opposite of pretending the problem does not exist.
Are you perhaps suffering from heat exhaustion, or are you normally this stupid?
Ah, I wasn’t clear enough, sometimes I forget the platform serves all manner of reading comprehension levels!
Let me explain, implications laid bare so you might get it: Managers, as humans, aren’t magic omnipotent boxes that automatically perceive value clearly. Much like all the other interactions with humans outside of a screen, basic social abilities go far! Strangers incapable of forming human connections tend to not go as far as acquaintances.
You don’t want to hear this, but being a stranger, or worse yet, a confirmed dickhead, means you’re first on the chopping block and last on the promotion list.
LLM management where profitability/second is constantly evaluated against everyone else might suit a social darwinian, ready to tread on the back of their fellows. I personally prefer civilization, where a 5 minute daily chat with someone I genuinely respect is a pretty nice price to pay for not having my throat slit because my productivity fell 7% when grandma died.
Demdaru@lemmy.world 2 days ago
There was an experiment where they simulated LLM performing various company roles. The higher you put it, the more effective it was… xD
sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 days ago
LLMs are great at being generalists.
They’d be better CEOs and VPs than most CEOs and VPs.
They read reports that more competent specialists make, and talk with other high level people who do the same.
AKA, they summarize complex data into a narrative and chat.
LLMs probably cost less than CEOs and VPs do.
So why are we trying to jam LLMs in to do the much more complicated jobs they are not so great at doing?
Oh, right, its because the owner class are delusional narcissistic sociopaths who just to feel appreciated and superior to others… and none of this is about making a better run company.
Its about enforcing a social caste system.
Demdaru@lemmy.world 2 days ago
IIRC article well enough, pros were that they were able to talk to anyone at company at the same time, had all data available constantly and were great at drawing normal from data so in standard scenarios they could easily lead the company.
They hallucinated sometimes, but research found that not more than actual CEO’s lol.
What they failed at was exceptional, bad situations. Too little data resulted in choices that ended with the simulated board firing them.
sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 days ago
This is exactly what I mean.
They just actually can do these kinds of tasks as well as people.
… and they’d be less expensive to run, in those roles, than the humans that currently have those salaries and stock options.
Unrealistic, boards haven’t fired or assasinated Elon yet, this is blatant anti-clanker bias.