“I think what a CEO does is maybe one of the easier things maybe for an AI to do one day,” he said. Although he didn’t talk specifically about CEO functions that an AI could do better, Pichai noted the tech will eliminate some jobs but also “evolve and transition” others—ramifications that mean “people will need to adapt.”
Pichai’s comments come as other tech CEOs have also predicted the coming of a new era of chief executive automations. OpenAI CEO Sam Altman previously said AI will someday do his job better than him, adding, “I will be nothing but enthusiastic the day that happens.” Sebastian Siemiatkowski, CEO of buy-now-pay-later firm Klarna, also said in a post on X earlier this year that “AI is capable of doing all our jobs, my own included.”
You don’t even need AI. Just pay staff less and charge customers more, and give the stolen money to shareholders. Ta-da! That’s the CEO’s job done.
That’s more an indictment of how we believe human society should be run than an endorsement of AI tbh
Dodge v Ford introduced the framework that made this country stray so far from greatness (on the topic of CEOs and corporations).
I’m waiting for the day when a major company has their AI CEO absolutely tank the company.
A computer can never be held accountable, so a computer should never hold a management position.
Also, Sundar Pichai is a dick.
He is vile like all of these corporate CEOs. I wish the U.S. would have its own Jacobin period to remove these scum from existence.
Not being held accountable is the main tenant of modern CEOs
Yea I’m not seeing any real difference. Something that plagurisng and takes credit for what others achieved and also isn’t held accountable for anything.
Quick we need an answer from our CEO ASAP! Sorry currently AWS and Cloudflare are down so were SOL.
if it’s so easy an ai could replace it than why are ceos the highest paid position in the company?
Because job difficulty and job pay aren’t correlated under capitalism.
The easiest job is to own assets. Not manage assets. Own them. Which is to say get your name on a title of a sufficiently large asset, and the money just rolls in while you sleep in bed. You sleep, your asset works. For a large enough asset this also provides the largest pay.
Owners need lieutenants to look after their assets. That’s what a CEO is.
So why are CEOs so highly paid? Because if you do not, they will embezzle (steal) money from your asset since they control every aspect of your asset’s daily functioning! So you need to cut the CEO in on the grift of being a big asset owner.
Easy for computers doesn’t mean it’s easy for humans, and vice versa.
Something that consistently makes bad choices with little more than random probability? You don’t say
You first, shithead
CEO’s job is to make business connections and get funding or contracts and stuff. People skills. LLM is really good at manipulation… If you give LLM a physical body, I would say it’s not that far-fetched…
AI can be such a good kiss ass, think of all the emotional suffering it’ll save existing CEOs from having to endure kissing ass of people they hate.
oh boy, another article about CEOs saying what “AI” could maybe do in the future. i’ll put this one in the pile with all the others
No this one makes sense though. AI is great at being critically misinformed and making terrible decisions. Of all the things they claim AI can do, I think this one is the closest.
I thought in America all the CEOs are geniuses and put on pedestals because they have money? You know, having money makes one an infallible genius.
How is an AI chatbot going to eat a business lunch?
One byte at a time?
And the 12 martinis?
Isn’t that just repeating what OP said?
You’ve never fed bologna sandwiches to a paper shredder?
That’s going on the list. My heart says I don’t need this, but my brain says I do.
Tbf the person they would eat the lunch with is also a chatbot girlfriend thing now.
The first thing a proper AI would do is solve the energy situation. Which will be allowed by 0 of the oil and energy industries. Solving that alone would reduce costs on EVERYTHING. Oligarchs would be out next. It’s not going to happen.
They can just hire grok to be the ceo
Then who will be held responsible for its decisions?
You suddenly want to make ceos responsible for decisions?
Wdym suddenly?
take responsibility in what sense? CEOs are not responsible in no other sense than to the stockholders and/or the board of directors and to the law. If they don’t break the law then the only responsibility they can take is resigning or being sacked. Failing in usually by not maximizing profits if it’s a for profit corporation. It really is a perfect job for a machine because the job really just requires following a preset directives to a letter even to the point of psychopathy.
The law. AI isn’t a person so it can’t be tried and punished for committing a crime.
I’m sure there are many jobs AI is not capable of doing but some CEOs probably do a bad enough job that an AI chat bot could probably do better.
I know we like to dump on CEOs all the time but a good CEO does not seem like one that could be replaced by AI, certainly not by what is currently being hyped. There are just a lot of highly visible companies with CEOs who aren’t actually very good. I suspect the dysfunction of publicly traded companies and the goals of Wall Street investors (or other nations’ equivalents) frequently not aligning with a good long-term health of a company has a strong influence on this.
And of course these guys will be happy to have AI replace them; they’ve already made boatloads of money and think they’ll be able to keep that going even if they lose their job.
Being a good CEO is 95% about social networking; creating and maintaining trustworthy relationships with others who will provide you with good support. AI can’t do this, as it’s a truly human thing.
That’s why a CEO in the future will be 100% networking and the AI will hand the decisions over for him/her to “make”.
Why would you assume that the AI who takes the CEO job will be a LLM or “chat bot”?
It might use a LLM to communicate the ideas, but probably not for large scale business strategi.
deleted by creator
Of course.
If you have CEOs who manage multiple companies, it means being CEO is never a full time job.
If we need to make good arguments against CEOs, at least try a little.
Wouldnt it be possible that “CEO” is different things in different companies?
Would it be possible that CEOs have people employed to take some of their tasks? Some CEOs, all their tasks?
Is a CEOs job the same when theres 50 people under him/her or 5000? Which do you think could run itself the best?
I also want the CEO job to be handle by someone who actually has a function, and is a good leader with morale and empathy.
But just saying “muuuh CEO bad because!!” is killing the discussion.
Would it be possible that CEOs have people employed to take some of their tasks? Some CEOs, all their tasks?
Is a CEOs job the same when theres 50 people under him/her or 5000? Which do you think could run itself the best?
If other people are doing your work for you then it sounds like you’re not working full time.
Exactly my point, which means you missed it.
The things you quoted pointed to the things making CEOs less important, while other points the opposite.
So just to be very clear about my point: CEOs are very different jobs. Some can be cut, some cant, because CEO doesnt really mean anything other than “person in charge”.
