The most fundamental duty of a CEO is to accept responsibility away from the board members, hence the large bonuses when they are let go. By definition, AI cannot do this. End of conversation.
Same goes for managers in most cases. Firing people because an AI said to simply won't hold ip in court, at least for now.
When was the last time a CEO went to jail because of illegal activities committed by the company? There is no responsibility.
If the "responsibility" is "you become rich, and if you get fired we give you a huge bonus on top", then I'm pretty sure anyone would be happy to take it.
Being a CEO is like being a politician. You need to convince others that they need you even if they don't, or you're incompetent, or you serve other interests. It's not what it takes to "lead a company", it's what it takes to "get the highly-paid job".
"some of you might die, but it's a risk I'm willing to take" - CEO handbook quote (only slightly paraphrased). This is all the risk there is for a CEO, change my mind.
In the US, this happens hundreds or thousands of times per year. The last major CEO was probably more recent, but you have high profile CEOs in Sam Bankman-Freid, Elizabeth Holmes, and Ken Lay. In fact, after Enron, CEOs and CFOs took on significantly more responsibility and risk by being personally liable for the financial statements. CEOs are arrested all of the time, so I’m not sure I understand your point.
If some employee of the company does something illegal, the CEO doesn't go to jail. The CEO is only responsible if one can prove that the CEO did something illegal. And that's the very least we can expect: CEOs are humans who should not be above the laws.
But you completely forget the whole spectrum of legal (including "shady") things: an incompetent CEO doesn't risk anything. They can sink a company, get fired and leave with a bonus bigger than most of the good employees will never earn in their lifetime. And then they will get hired as CEO of another company, because nobody seems to care. This is not responsibility.
That's only a "risk" if the organisation is doing illegal things which are driven by leadership. CEOs are not arrested for law breaking they had nothing to do with.
I mentioned this to someone the other day, and they rebuffed that part of what you get with a CEO is their network and their ability to network. AI won't replace that, at least not anytime soon.
I think this is true. There was an article on HN the other day about how Moderna has already re-organized its leadership structure around AI.
It makes sense to me that AI could conceivably already be as good at making the hard, data-based decisions that CEOs make, and that, therefore, they could one day be replaced by AI. Meanwhile, you've got the soft skills part of being an executive, which humans are better at (as long as the people they deal with are also humans). So, you could split that CEO role into two parts, each specializing in half of what a CEO today does. Both roles would probably do a better job than the median CEO today, and get paid less overall.
But that "not anytime soon" part is the only thing I disagree with. Because I just don't know how long the timeline is for stuff like that. It can change pretty fast.
Will they really get paid less? The feeling I have now is that people are paid a lot not because of what they do, but because of the potential damage they can do in case they fucked up. E.g. CEOs, lawyers, etc. Moving some of the work to AI doesn't reduce the risk, so they should have the same pay in my mental model.
Plus C-level executives typically don't lower their pay, and IMO investors apparently don't care that much about their pay, I can't see a reason why their pay will be reduced (significantly).
CEO's typically make decisions when there isn't enough data to support the obvious direction. In this way, they are anti-pattern finders that rely on gut or some anecdotal experience. They are most often wrong, but when they are right and it's a success they are considered genius. I'm not sure an AI can make a non-obvious decision based on feeling.
Did you find any way to generate good ideas with AI? Anecdotally, I found it incredibly unsatisfactory in this sense. It normally re-hashes old ideas without any internal coherence, like those novelty websites combining two existing startups to create a random mission (e.g. “AirBnB for motorbikes”).
When you consider that LLMs are trained on what can be scrapped from the web, the so called "creativity" comes from mashing together less commonly co-associated ideas.
Also, a CEO defines which way the company will go and makes questionable decisions like opting to build a Cybertruck. I don't see AIs doing these type of decisions, which are many, for now.
Anyone born in Buffets generation and are not rich wasn’t even getting out of bed.
A proper assessment of their skill relative to the ground truth they lived would be nice. One cannot simply walk into an office and rub elbows now. And the other half of the gender, and minorities make up a much larger part of the work force
New Deal bootstrapping then Reaganomics putting thumbs on the scales for those generations too.
His biggest asset was J&J when government was spending tons on health propaganda and grooming cause Americans used to be a bunch of greasy slobs. Oh look comb and toothbrush and mouthwash sales are staples buy buy buy then inflate through media propaganda and tax policy.
Probably because not all CEOs are the same, like anything people do. There's good and involved ones and other where we wonder what they're really doing.
If you want to convince people to use your spaced repetition software over Anki, you need to tell us what's so wrong with Anki that can't be fixed with plugins and that's worth $10 per year.
You want something for free? I'll give you something for free.
Anki absolutely can be improved. For new users, it's very confusing: having multiple decks, the separation between cards and notes, and the search interface are hard for new users.
Combine something that is simpler for new users with a demonstrably better algorithm and you might have a minimally viable product. But you need the product FIRST before you request money.
Give us something that we can run for one week and know that it's better than the free software that is Anki.
Thank you for the advice!
I have pre-orders for ideas to be validated. I start building it in public on Twitter after even one pre-order.
Because wasting time over something people wouldn't pay for doesn't make sense to me.
If you don't like the thing, you can always get back to me on discord server I add you to after the purchase.
I basically want to make anki the beginner friendly way.
What excites me? Discovery. Finding significant patterns that no one recognized before. Predicting what's going to happen. My knowledge of computer science and statistics helps me discover new information from mounds of data.
To get my interest, express how much data science (especally statistics) are in your positions.
Streaming is constantly removing movies. There were fewer movies on Netflix streaming in 2022 than there were in 2015 (source: https://www.whats-on-netflix.com/news/netflixs-movie-library... ) And, according to the same source, Netflix has almost no movies from before 2000.
People might start looking to DVDs for more variety in their movies!
> Yeah, but DVDs have horrible picture quality, at lousy 480p resolution.
It is 720p. And the image quality is much better than Netflix's HD. I tried to look at Valerian on Netflix. The colours were so bad that i decided to look at the DVD instead. Sound on Netflix is terrible.
As the other poster noted, the vast majority of DVDs are 480p, not 720p. DVDs don't have enough capacity for higher resolutions for full-length movies.
On the high seas, you can easily get 720p, 1080p, and frequently 2160p versions of everything, with extremely high-quality multi-channel audio, usually in either h.264 or x.265 codecs, and at a variety of bitrates (in case that 50GB 4k BD rip is too much for you).
> Faced with this sort of argument, a lot of people will pay lipservice to the need for things like body language, facial expressions, and eye contact, but as an antisocial autistic person, I am afraid that I can't bring myself to understand the importance for such things (if it even exists.)
That sentence is the key to the whole article. Koshka doesn't understand that multiple, simultaneous channels of information give richer information than the strict meaning of the text.
If you don't believe that information is conveyed through body language, facial expressions, and eye contact, then try watching a movie in a language that you don't understand, without subtitles.
My wife and I went to Germany once and my wife, being in TV/movies/theater, took me to some German theater... which was obviously all in German... which she speaks, and I don't. Thanks love /s
Anyway, although I couldn't understand what was being _said_, I could understand what was being _shown_ to me _visually_. I got the idea of each scene: that guy is a gangster and has a blood feud with that guy, who is chasing that chick's heart, and also is on the run from the cops, and so on.
Without the language, I understood easily 70-80% of what was going on.
Their main user base is driven by nostalgia. Hopefully their attempts to modernize don't go so far as to alienate their existing users.
Right now they have a god awful synthesis of three types of GUI wrappers for their webpages, so as you navigate across the site nothing stays consistent. Sometimes the language will randomly change to Spanish. It's website gore.
If they would spend the money to create a consistent user experience across all their pages, not introducing one page at a time, but actually biting the bullet and pushing the change across the whole site, that would be a step in the right direction.
Look at Musk. He's CEO of six companies (or so), yet has time to run DOGE and constantly post on X.