Meta will record employee screens, clicks, and keystrokes to train AI that may replace them

[Liranan]

Train Actually Indians on H1B and other visas. Can't wait for the next fake university to be uncovered.

 

[Morphology]

Clowns. They must be stopped.

 

[URUKHAI]

In fact, the claim that "the embrace of automation has led to thousands of job losses recently" at Meta is thoroughly unsupported by the source used. It points to a TechSpot article that shows 600 layoffs in an AI team in an unrelated layoff. The article gave a specific example of an employee who was quickly rehired by a different company. This was half a year ago. In a company with 80,000 employees, small layoffs due to occasional restructuring are routine (less than 1% of employees).

To me, this article is clearly biased against AI. The author is injecting his own opinion about AI without evidence to back it up. The reporting at TechSpot has increasingly been pointing to a boogeyman, generally aimed at big tech. Maybe the website should be renamed to AntiTechSpot.

First, 8,000 is 10%, not 1% of 80,000.
Second, it is not anti-AI bias to acknowledge published/documented data about layoffs. Especially when the very same companies boast earnings largely predicated on the very same layoffs which in the tech sector definitely include positions and job functions that have been replaced by AI-driven platforms and resources.
Meta is not the only company following the same playbook. There will be ramifications but, because we're such a technology-driven and simultaneously short-sighted, we'll keep knee-capping ourselves blindly.

https://economictimes.indiatimes.co...fear-in-us/articleshow/131010353.cms?from=mdr

 

[Plutoisaplanet]

First, 8,000 is 10%, not 1% of 80,000.

Context matters, so please look at what I actually said:

In fact, the claim that "the embrace of automation has led to thousands of job losses recently" at Meta is thoroughly unsupported by the source used. It points to a TechSpot article that shows 600 layoffs in an AI team in an unrelated layoff.

600 is indeed less than 1% of 80,000. Please show me where any jobs have been laid off due to AI at Meta prior to this news.

As to your second point, I agree bad news is not biased news. But at TechSpot, almost all news I've read about AI has been bad news. The most recent example had an almost entirely fictional headline. It claimed that a data center used 29 million gallons of water without paying for it, except it was construction that used up the water lol.

Anyways, what you quoted specifically pointed out that the author made up evidence in order to support an opinion. Why don't you look at what I was actually responding to instead of bringing up other stuff to avoid what I was talking about?