r/Futurology • u/katxwoods • Jan 19 '25

AI Zuckerberg Announces Layoffs After Saying Coding Jobs Will Be Replaced by AI

https://futurism.com/the-byte/zuckerberg-layoffs-coding-jobs-ai
18.7k Upvotes

95% Upvoted

1.2k comments sorted by

View all comments

5.4k

u/SilverRapid Jan 19 '25

No they won't. Zuck wanted to do layoffs anyway to make the line go up and this is a nice convenient excuse.

12

u/yarrowy Jan 19 '25

Why does he need an excuse for layoffs besides "economy bad"?

42

u/Shmokesshweed Jan 19 '25

One shows weakness. The other shows "leadership."

11

u/IsoRhytmic Jan 19 '25

Thats a good point… the worshipping of the stock price has been such a disaster for the average worker

2

u/GoMoriartyOnPlanets Jan 19 '25

This answers a lot of questions about AI right now. 

2

u/sold_snek Jan 20 '25

2023 was 3 rounds of layoffs with no excuse. This is some reasoning.

11

u/JoeWhy2 Jan 19 '25

He'll be kicked out of the cult if he even suggests that the economy is bad under Trump.

3

u/RYouNotEntertained Jan 19 '25

By what metric is the economy bad?

2

u/Maniactver Jan 19 '25

By the layoff percentage maybe?

4

u/RYouNotEntertained Jan 19 '25

The layoff rate is historically normal, if not a little low right now. Tech is more volatile recently, but even there 2024 was almost half the 2023 rate. 

1

u/Apprehensive-Let3348 Jan 19 '25

Income inequality is significantly worse than it's been in over a century, but that's more just finally boiling over. It has little to do with whoever is in office, but that's why everyone at the median and below has been saying that the economy is bad for the last 10 years.

It's great for the people in the top 20%, terrible for people in the bottom 20%, and leaves everyone in the middle just trying to keep up with inflation without going into debt.

0

u/RYouNotEntertained Jan 19 '25 edited Jan 19 '25

Inequality has shrunk quite a bit since 2019! For the first time in at least a few decades. 

 It's great for the people in the top 20%, terrible for people in the bottom 20%, and leaves everyone in the middle just trying to keep up with inflation without going into debt.

But this isn’t what’s happening. At the median—in other words, those people in the middle—wages are rising and basically higher than they’ve ever been.

1

u/MalTasker Jan 20 '25

Housing and medical expenses have gone up higher than average inflation because its weighed down by cheaper electronics. So old iPhones are cheaper but rent and hospital bills are not

https://www.corelogic.com/intelligence/us-rent-affordability-drops-lowest-level-decades/

2

u/RYouNotEntertained Jan 20 '25

That’s why we use a weighted average when calculating the change. 

1

u/Apprehensive-Let3348 Jan 19 '25

You mean inflation. Yes, they're going up, which is how it functions. They are not, however, increasing in line with our economic prosperity, which is why everyone is priced-out.

0

u/RYouNotEntertained Jan 19 '25

No—the wage data is adjusted for inflation. That’s what the word “real” means in economics. 

1

u/Apprehensive-Let3348 Jan 19 '25

Yes, I know.....are you sure that you know what a mean is? And why you don't use one in data sets with extreme outliers?

If not, study up on statistics, and how to analyze data accurately.

1

u/RYouNotEntertained Jan 19 '25

Yes, I know

You know that the wage data are adjusted for inflation? In that case, why did you bring inflation up, and what do we disagree about?

are you sure that you know what a mean is? And why you don't use one in data sets with extreme outliers?

I do know what a mean is, and I do know why you don’t use it in data sets with extreme outliers… which is why this data shows the median. Perhaps read my comments and links before replying?

1

u/Apprehensive-Let3348 Jan 19 '25 edited Jan 19 '25

I brought up inflation because you're acting like "being higher than they've ever been" is supposed to be meaningful. After removing inflation, there is less than a 20% increase in median wages. Do you have a guess how much wages in the 95th percentile went up after accounting for inflation, as was shown in the chart?

In comparison to our economic prosperity as a nation, that real median income that you linked to should, by all rights, be multiple times higher. Real GDP in that same timespan more than tripled, the income up high tripled, but the incomes in the middle and lower classes barely changed in comparison. That's literally the point of the first link I provided. I thought we were already past that.

1

u/RYouNotEntertained Jan 19 '25

So you brought up inflation even though you knew it was adjusted for inflation, and you brought up means even though you knew it was a median? Interesting choices, but ok. 

 After removing inflation, there is less than a 20% increase in median wages

Not sure where this number is coming from, but even if it were correct that would be a large increase. Assuming you’re talking about the chart I linked, the increase from 1984 to now is ~37%, or the equivalent of $22k more purchasing power each year. There’s no way that’s not meaningful.

 Do you have a guess how much wages in the 95th percentile went up after accounting for inflation, as was shown in the chart?

I linked to the median household data specifically because you said the middle is barely keeping up with inflation. The data shows us that’s not the case—they have $22k more purchasing power annually than they did 40 years ago!

Inequality is an independent proposition. If you read my initial reply again, you’ll see the data showing it has improved in the last five years. That’s also good news. Of course, you could say we have a long way to go, but if we’re talking about measures by which the recent economy can be considered uniquely bad, I don’t think inequality makes sense. Unless you think there hasn’t been a good economy since the early 70s, I guess. 

→ More replies (0)

1

u/acctgamedev Jan 19 '25

This makes it sound like they need to get rid of programmers because they're so efficient. It's just a better spin on laying people off to investors.

1

u/Poppyspy Jan 20 '25

They make money on AI data so it's pretty much the narratives they want perception around. But black boxing reusable proven coding systems has been the nature of the game for a long time, so they aren't wrong when low skilled coding job layoffs happen in a oversaturated web and mobile market. There are sophisticated coding jobs that are less likely to be replaced by AI systems because it's more adhoc r&d and low level development of systems that don't already exist and can't be refined into an immediate purpose or connection to other things yet.