I see. So these stupid AI companies, with crap only right 60% of the time bots, and no path to profitability is a reason to drag Millennials for opportunistically slurping up subsidies off the world's stupidest investors: Silicon Valley VCs. Instead of a reason to point out how idiotic LLMs and VCs are.

Sure.

Man, this AI bubble has been an incredible opportunity for CEOs to show just how clueless and worthless they are.

The funny thing is, they have the jobs that are best replaced by AI chatbots: bullshitting, while sounding confident.

Unfortunately for them, with their ridiculously exorbitant salaries, even if the AI companies were to charge the true cost for queries, unlike the subsidized prices at the moment, it would still be economical to replace most CEOs with.a bot.

Ah, so the economy is tanking and they need an excuse for layoffs, besides 'we're expensive and next to useless'.

Heh, they said "pushed a bit further toward the tip".

You're really not very bright, are you?

He doesn't know what he means either.

Conservatives just say shit, without feeling the need for it to be based in data or logic. They have a belief system, that everything and everyone else must bend to. Numbers, be damned.

And, they'll keep saying random blather, so time is wasted pointing out over and over again how not knowing what the fuck they are talking about won't keep them from running their idiot mouths. Every moment spent pointing out they are insincere morons is a moment not spent getting actual useful shit done, and for people where a belief system is all that matters, that's a win.

The current vogue to have everyone on a team interview candidates is silly.

Many people don't know what their colleagues do, or how they do it, in any great level of detail. Nor, do they usually give the candidate or the outputs they desire from the position much thought, before stepping into the interview room. It becomes a multi-person clusterfuck of kabuki theater where people look for 'signs' of employability. Signs which are usually just poorly founded personal biases. It's akin to having a bunch of anti-vaxxers hire a Director of Public Health.

Instead, let managers hire. Let them craft a team and make the call about who to hire. It's supposedly their job to find a way to make team members with disparate skills and personalities gel into a whole that is greater than the sum of its parts, after all.

Benefit One: This is a great way to find and eliminate people that are shitty at managing. If you suck at hiring a team that then goes on to fail, you should be removed from managing said team, because you clearly do not understand your staff and what they do.

Benefit Two: Hiring would not be a multi-week slog to schedule everyone on the team to stop their work and poorly interview a candidate, then hand wring about whether the candidate is the one they want to 'give the rose' in the dating game of self-deluded bullshit.