Stargate has one of the best "current era" sci-fi toys: the stargate itself.

However that best toy is also it's bane, with bad writing. That being said we see plenty of bad writing destroying series. Parts of Earth: Final Conflict were written extremely well... with other parts being trope written stupidity.

Star Trek's various series is often at odds with itself over the quality of writing.

The entirety of Alien and/or Predator has often had writing flailing.

In the end a well written Stargate series would be a wonderful show. They need to try something different. Different is scary to entertainment executives, and if you don't believe that you don't understand why so many cookie cutter sequel movies are greenlit.

Do you only hire entry level positions locally?

My hiring manager says thank you.

Are you not hiring any entry level people?

Again, my hiring manager says thank you.

My worry is not about the companies, it's the regular employees. We're going to see Andreessen and Softbank get paid if these IPO's go forward like SpaceX.

Worse: We're going to see average investors in retail funds are *forced* to buy SpaceX (and Anthropic, and OpenAI) at the top. This will hurt many for the benefit of a very select few.

Unfortunately it looks like AI companies are trying to use retail investors, along with pension funds and other retirement accounts, to bail out all the VC money.

Anecdotal evidence from a friend: "Guess what? No longer wasting time being forced to using AI. FREEDOM!"

Should that hold true for more people I wouldn't bet much on AI adoption.

Is this a case of "Don't you dare publish that our AI isn't that great!" or something else?

I'm going to guess it's all about bagholders wanted...

Now we get to see how "creative" Anthropic and OpenAI have been overall. Should these be the same level as the SpaceX IPO it's all about getting early money out before the hype bubble pops.

I'm guessing they ran out of private money and are DESPERATE to either 1) get the big money out and preserve their status in the valley, or 2) get money to keep the furnaces burning while they pray for inference to get magically cheaper.

They have how many billions of compute commitments? They owe how much money in circular financing? How many articles have started exposing that LLM's are not really reasoning, they're reinforcing? How many have started questioning LLM utility? How many have started questioning LLM cost? How many businesses are starting go, "What's the actual ROI on this AI stuff that's costing us a lot of money?" How many are starting to question if AGI is possible with LLM's while pointing at other technologies that might be more suitable?

LLM's are basically losing their luster with the media, and are no longer getting only positive coverage from everyone. Add in the negative coverage over data centers, and the way that they are being approved under the table, and more negative factors appear. This is a threat, not just to OpenAI and Anthropic, but also companies like Oracle and other hyperscalers who combined probably have a cool trillion in financial debt either on the books or on the side in SPV's. There is also a huge threat to nVidia if people start canceling, or can't pay for, the modules they purchased. On top of that if the market starts to soften the outlook for Vera Rubin will crater. Can you say stock sell off? That could get ugly fast spreading beyond them to other companies including but not limited to manufacturers of: memory, racks, electrical, aluminum wire, basically everything on backorder now due to AI.

At that point: Pop goes the bubble.

Except you have different levels of employee. I see teams hiring entry level people remotely... if they are hiring an entry level position.

What's really going on is senior people are not leaving, there's only so many senior slots, which means the people below them do not move up. That means the "junior" doesn't move up. That means no new junior person is hired. The static situation hurts entry level people most of all groups because they have the least flexibility. A senior person can stay the same or move down perhaps even up, the general analyst can stay the same or move up/down, during moves. An entry level person is limited to entry level jobs.

LIAR!

They employ people in the Philippines!

I'm joking, of course. The fact there are even lower wage workers in another country doesn't really help. These companies are so cheap, they won't even employ people in the US to watch over their wayward gadgets. What's hilarious, and terrifying, is that Waymo is better than many at automated driving.

The problem for all the AI companies is that means they've built a discount version of the Library Computer Access Retrieval System (LCARS) with questionable data. That is not AGI. That is not intelligence at all. That is a search engine with a different, many times using a terrible, interface.

That tool, while useful in some ways, is nowhere near worth the billions they've burned selling it as the tool to do everything. That means Sam, Dario, Elon, and the rest spent the GDP of several countries to build a fancier Wikipedia.

and blame AI. Another thing is it could be Salesforce all over again. Build a new phone tree with "AI" while saying you're eliminating a bunch of jobs, but give most people new job titles that are (effectively) the same jobs they previously held.

One has to wonder what would if a not insignificant number of people called the company handling their mutual funds to escape. You have to wonder what the response would be at the index funds if money started being moved.

Not that it's likely to happen - most people don't know how to move money from one fund to another... heck many don't even understand that they can move money to different funds.

aren't politically connected to the "right' people. They only want to punish peons, not the "important" people.

Let's be brutally honest: You have a community with Flock Safety (or other ALPR) cameras? You should be petitioning local officials to remove them immediately. They refuse? They should be subjected to recalls and / or have someone run to replace them outright. The people replacing them should have a known mandate to eliminate the cameras.

Until the politicians can be recalled the secondary line of change that should be brought up if a council and / or police are asking for these cameras (or refusing to remove the cameras) is the demand that one be placed on the street of the people supporting these cameras, with their property in direct view. When they start to bloviate ask them why they wouldn't want to be safer? That's the point, right? Safety? Not tracking whenever you drive by the cameras? I mean, if they've got nothing to hide then they have nothing to fear.

When in power any police chief or officer supporting these cameras should also be fired and replaced.

This will take longer to correct at the state level, but don't stop at the local level. These cameras are not just a dystopian stupidity, they are also massive national security risks.

Most businesses are doing it because the executives have been sold on the news cycle. Also saying "WE R TOTES IN ON AI!!!" means you get free stock bump even if you fire people for other reasons, but say it's because of AI. AI washing job losses is something that is going to have to be studied after the hype train crashes.

That and people have been told it's more efficient blah blah blah. That and sometimes people are told "You must train to use, and use, AI." by their teachers and bosses. The problem being AI is -expletive- terrible. In the job I do there is a regular amount of troubleshooting tasks. This is because while things usually go to plan, when they break they just break. That means a little bit of hard work trying to figure out why. Figuring out why can mean digging through things that get increasingly esoteric until you find out why. AI, to be blunt, -expletive- sucks at this overall. Why? It can't even parse technical documentation properly. I have younger coworkers who I have trained who will also not use AI because: AI sucks, and believing what it spits out as an "answer" sucks the big felota to quote the Expanse. AI is a time suck. Learning to ask a question, something that is a skill, and reading comprehension, are still the two most important human skills. Doesn't matter if you're a carpenter, IT analyst, or an MD, those two matter the most today.

The problem with that one is that AI is a terrible problem solver and, if the arc of performance remains the same, will never come close to matching people. I mean, it'd be one thing if it could come close. Having seen it, and humanoid robots, in action I'm left with the bitter truth: AI sucks the big felota. Humanoid robots suck the big felota. They just can't match, not even close outside of tests setup by the companies, people. Anthropic touted Claude passing a bunch of tests, but forgot to mention they wrote the tests. OpenAI touted ChatGPT doing well on some tests, but forgot to note they dropped the ones that AI typically fails hard. You see marathon and kung fu bots, but what you don't see (exception given to Boston Dynamics which even created gag reels) is the massive amount of work put into scripting a particular performance.

I think we'll see what you're saying, right up to the point it breaks. The problem is that AI is all smoke and mirrors, at least for now. You can't really replace a bunch of people. Even at Salesforce the CEO had to admit most of the people were reassigned, ironically to very similar jobs like customer sales, services, and success. Speaking of someone who did support, aka service, in college let me just say that's a fancy way of saying they built a new phone tree.