They were the start of it, but they didn’t account for all of it. And, to be clear, it’s very much an over-correction. As usual they’re going to swing too hard in the opposite direction figuring that everyone else is doing it too, so if they have to hire people back, well they’ll be doing it in a flooded labour market so they can probably just re-hire the same people for less money.
You’re correct and I have no idea why idiots are downvoting you for saying this. Obviously, yes, to some degree companies are testing the waters on using “AI labour” in place of people - Klarna, etc - but for the most part AI is a useful excuse for these companies to dump a bunch of headcount that they warehoused for years just to keep everyone else from getting there first. In large part this is also because investors have finally started to wise up to layoffs not actually being an automatic good for a company. Used to be the word layoffs instantly jacked your share price, but now it’s more of a wait and see attitude, if not outright concern, so they have to wrap up the layoffs in a big AI coat to make them look good.
Edit: To clarify this a little, it’s not just overhiring. It’s that these companies were in a massively over-hired position - many still are to varying degrees - and they’re being pushed to show “growth”. There aren’t really a lot of ways left to do that (capitalism is basically eating itself), but reducing headcount gives you at least a temporary bump in profit, since your overheads go down right away, while any loss of revenue takes a while to hit. The combination of bloated headcounts and a need to show higher profits is the toxic swamp water here, while AI is the packet of kool-aid powder they’re adding to make it look good.
2nd Edit, to previous poster: You should read the article though, it has far less to do with “AI layoffs” than it does with Jensen Huang desperately trying to put out fires, which is very telling.
I didn’t read the article but a lot of the “AI layoffs” are more about correcting the over-hiring from the COVID era.
Oh my God. Now I’ve heard it all. 🤣
I would have thought the mass layoffs in 2023, which eclipse the projected layoffs for this year, would have been the COVID correction.
They were the start of it, but they didn’t account for all of it. And, to be clear, it’s very much an over-correction. As usual they’re going to swing too hard in the opposite direction figuring that everyone else is doing it too, so if they have to hire people back, well they’ll be doing it in a flooded labour market so they can probably just re-hire the same people for less money.
well they are recording profits everytime they lay off.
No, they really aren’t
You’re correct and I have no idea why idiots are downvoting you for saying this. Obviously, yes, to some degree companies are testing the waters on using “AI labour” in place of people - Klarna, etc - but for the most part AI is a useful excuse for these companies to dump a bunch of headcount that they warehoused for years just to keep everyone else from getting there first. In large part this is also because investors have finally started to wise up to layoffs not actually being an automatic good for a company. Used to be the word layoffs instantly jacked your share price, but now it’s more of a wait and see attitude, if not outright concern, so they have to wrap up the layoffs in a big AI coat to make them look good.
Edit: To clarify this a little, it’s not just overhiring. It’s that these companies were in a massively over-hired position - many still are to varying degrees - and they’re being pushed to show “growth”. There aren’t really a lot of ways left to do that (capitalism is basically eating itself), but reducing headcount gives you at least a temporary bump in profit, since your overheads go down right away, while any loss of revenue takes a while to hit. The combination of bloated headcounts and a need to show higher profits is the toxic swamp water here, while AI is the packet of kool-aid powder they’re adding to make it look good.
2nd Edit, to previous poster: You should read the article though, it has far less to do with “AI layoffs” than it does with Jensen Huang desperately trying to put out fires, which is very telling.
Well, you said it… they are idiots. I wasn’t about to start arguing with them.
Good call, honestly.