• roscoe@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 day ago

    I disagree.

    Fuck this data driven bullshit. We need to return to a time where executives with a vision are empowered. We need to have decisions made by the kind of people who say things like “I know only 10% of people watch Mindhunters but that’s the kind of show that brings people to our service”.

    If things stay the way they are get used to watching 7-8 seasons of mediocre lowest common denominator bullshit and having your favorite shows cancelled after one or two seasons.

    • nieminen@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      1 day ago

      I can’t disagree with you, but the current executives and how they function can easily be replaced by current ai models. Would be nice to get innovation back, but all the competition is gone now.

      • roscoe@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 day ago

        Absolutely. I’m not advocating keeping the current dipshits that cancel shows that would have been kept around as “prestige shows” a couple decades ago. I just don’t want to see it get even worse by going harder on numbers alone.

      • There is still some completion. I particularly enjoy a lot of movies from A24. Although, they’re now worth a lot of money so will be interesting to see if they start to churn out garbage or keep making things that are different.

        • nieminen@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 day ago

          I meant competition in general, not just for movies. There’s basically 3 companies that own everything, and they collude rather than compete.

  • Clinicallydepressedpoochie@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    76
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    Musk proves that a CEO could jerk off into a milk carton 18 hours a day, everyday, then drink it on Facebook live and the company would just be business as usual.

  • shutz@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    26
    ·
    2 days ago

    Weird Al should create an AI of Weird Al, and call it Weird AI. I think that would settle the debate once and for all.

    • MonkeMischief
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      1 day ago
      • Worker-owned and operated.
      • “CEO” is just an algorithm that occasionally suggests CEO-y things the employees vote on. You don’t even have to pay it and all it wants is to be included in an occasional pizza party and told it’s doing good work.
      • ???
      • Profit (but for everyone!)!
    • funkless_eck@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      26
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      2 days ago

      unfortunately Cleese in his elder years hasn’t really moved with the times. While this quote is fairly right-on, he’s also said a bunch of fairly right-wing crap too.

      • juanito_the_great@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        1 day ago

        Edit: Didn’t know about his other views. I no longer consider his views forgivable.

        He is remarkably progressive and lucid for his age, so I’m inclined to cut him some slack for the topics I wholeheartedly disagree about with him.

        For example, his support for Brexit I find hard to forgive… but unlike most of the ghouls that supported it, he seems genuine in his opinions and remains at odds and vocally against the Global Far Right.

        • IcyToes@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          17
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 day ago

          You kidding? He’s been railing against woke etc. He’s on the right of UK politics. Would probably be further if it was acceptable.

          A very funny and clever man during his youth. That guy is gone.

        • gmtom@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          11
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 day ago

          What??

          The guys is openly transphobic, is part of the whole “comedy is ruined because if woke” crowd, is anti immigrant and anti-muslim and like you said, is pro brexit, but you want to cut him some slack because he’s “genuine” in his transphobia and xenophobia???

        • vga@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          1 day ago

          I think he was more like a moderate, unironical centrist. The people he hung out with (rest of the Pythons that is) were more progressive which probably caused some sort of social contagion on him as long as he was with them.

          I think he was being serious when he did this bit: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eZ4fyWhp-KM

    • Viking_Hippie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      38
      ·
      2 days ago

      Reminds me of a famous quote from Danish humorist Storm P:

      “He who understands humor as only humor and seriousness as only seriousness has misunderstood both”

      • Klear@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        1 day ago

        Also from Hagakure (though I know it from Ghost Dog: The Way of the Samurai):

        Among the maxims on Lord Naoshige’s wall, there was this one: “Matters of great concern should be treated lightly.” Master Ittei commented, “Matters of small concern should be treated seriously.”

  • ArbitraryValue@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    25
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 days ago

    I’m sure AI would replace executives (at least in publicly held companies) the moment that doing so would be profitable.

    • Stamets@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      42
      ·
      2 days ago

      That’s the thing. They’ve proven that it’s profitable now. They’ve shown in countless different sectors that slashing jobs and replacing them with AI has been profitable. They’ve never done it at the executive level because they’d be voting in their own redundancy. They, unlike 99% of those other sectors, actually get to have a say in what happens here. Why would they ever willingly kill their own jobs? They’ll slash everyone elses first to raise their profits as much as humanly possible. I genuinely don’t see that ever changing unless some Delamain type shit happening where the AI gains enough ability to forcibly takeover the company without anyone ever noticing.

      • ArbitraryValue@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        2 days ago

        I think you may be conflating the executives of a (publicly held) corporation and the corporation itself. Even executives are ultimately still employees. They’re trying to maximize profits because that’s their job, not because they get to keep the profits. They can be fired by the board of directors (and through it the stockholders) and they will be fired and replaced if the board decides that someone else (either another human or an AI) would do a better job.

        I’m ignoring a lot of complications but I think that what I wrote is a good general description.

        • Jax@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          15
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 days ago

          Idk man, the simple math of CEOs being given bigger and bigger bonuses - seemingly across the corporate board - tells me what you’re saying is wrong.

          • RedstoneValley@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            edit-2
            2 days ago

            It really depends on the company structure. Oftentimes a company is a subsidiary of another company. The CEOs of those companies are usually employees

            Edit: But you are right about the boni

        • crusa187@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          2 days ago

          CEOs very commonly serve as board members for their friends’ companies. In many instances they’re the same thing.

        • Stamets@lemmy.worldOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 days ago
          1. The amount that executives get paid (Especially when connected to efficiency levels) says you are dead wrong. They do get to keep the profit. High the profit margins, the higher their bonuses, the higher their salaries when renegotiating.

          2. The board only gets their information from who, exactly? The executives. Who run the business day to day and who actually have more of a vested interest than the board. The board of directors doesn’t magically aquire this data. They get it from the executives who are hired with the sole purpose of running that business in the best possible way to maximize profit and revenue for the board.

          You wrote a good general description but you completely missed my point.

      • vin@lemmynsfw.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 days ago

        Nvidia and Microsoft are investing in agentic AI. Boards might end up finding one that they can trust.

      • NoForwardslashS@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 days ago

        This makes me wonder if the endgame is having everyone in a company, including executives, replaced by AI. Then the AI execs rehiring humans in every non-exec/managerial position.

  • makyo@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    2 days ago

    That is my dream for AI tools - that creatives can very cheaply produce great entertainment without the blessings and wallets of the fat cats

  • 000@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    2 days ago

    I am confused.

    There is currently no AI system/tool that can even do a fraction of CEOs job.

    People don’t understand that CEOs are also employees and they would be replaced as soon as something valuable can replace them while making a acceptable amount of mistakes.

    • gmtom@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 day ago

      You’re being downvoted, but your right.

      There isn’t an AI tool that can go out for 3 hour long £4,000 lunches with other CEOs.

      There isn’t an AI tool that can do cocaine and play golf.

      There isn’t an AI tool that can depend millions of dollars in compensation as a golden parachute when it massively screws up the company to the point where thousands of employees lose their jobs.

    • IcyToes@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 day ago

      Take direction from a board, formulate a plan, no matter how bad or wrong and be confident of it. Sounds exactly like AI.

      • frayedpickles@lemmy.cafe
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 day ago

        Lie but not in a traceable way to the board is actually the first step. And then the plan usually involves random layoffs since the 90s, since actually doing better is hard and the board just wants short term gains so they can leave.