Was just talking to a friend at a US technology company, they’ve had their budget reduced by 50% as the company says it wants to announce “the largest layoffs in US corporate history” to prove GenAI can replace jobs.

There’s no plan to actually replace the jobs with GenAI.. they just have to decimate their area.

Not naming company as the staff don’t know they’re about to fed to the line going up.

The vibe I'm getting from lots of people at lots of orgs now is, you know during Fyre Festival, that marketing dude was like "Let's just do it and be legends, man!" when challenged about issues.

That's the GenAI plan fundamentally. Lots of people are making decisions without really knowing what they're doing, because everybody else is doing it. FOMO marketing.

I suspect a lot of large companies are going to look like this in a few years:

@GossiTheDog the piss in other ppl’s tents phase is going to be wild

@GossiTheDog
FOMO marketing seems to be all there is anymore in tech.

Sucks in the short to medium term.

@fennix @GossiTheDog

Oh God, so glad I retired

@GossiTheDog Amazing how many people's lives Roko's basilisk will ruin by simply never existing.
@GossiTheDog There won’t even be cheese sandwiches.

@GossiTheDog my annoyance is the companies are going to be ok, because they are all making the same bet. They'll find ways to make the money work eventually; or write off the losses.

It's the people who will suffer unnecessarily because of this bullshit.

@andrewmelder @GossiTheDog they'll find the legal and economic framework to make it "well actually, it's everybody else's loss". Probably gonna put an organ tax on all the poors to bail em out.

@andrewmelder @GossiTheDog The answer to "too big to fail" is nationalisation. Let the organisation continue to run but take it from the shareholders.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_hazard

Moral hazard - Wikipedia

@EI3JDB @andrewmelder I've always liked the "how many shares does this bailout buy me?" Approach. The best part is, the longer they resist, the cheaper the shares get!

@msb @andrewmelder I wasn't thinking of a bailout. When companies go bankrupt, a receiver decides what happens next - and that is normally appointed by the government. If the company is restructured the receiver could elect to pay suppliers and employees, while telling shareholders and bondholders that they get nothing. The government simply assumes control and injects just enough working capital to keep things working.

From the moment the company goes insolvent, it's all up to the receiver.

@EI3JDB @andrewmelder
Yeah, I just took that a step further. The government should never just inject capital. The corporation should do what every other Corp does and issue shares commensurate to the size of the funds provided. Shares go into a managed fund, and the corp gets right of first refusal to buy them back at market rates.

@msb @andrewmelder My view is that, at the point the bankruptcy happens, the shares cease to exist. If the company was performing a public good that makes it "too big to fail" then the government owns everything and the shareholders and bondholders get nothing - just as they would if the government let the organisation fail.

All taxpayer money should go to that public good. Not one penny for the people that ignored the risk.

@EI3JDB @andrewmelder
I agree in principal, but real life is rarely so straight forward. The idea of an appointed receiver would certainly head off a lot of problems and loopholes, but I suspect there would be a lot of value in saving the corporate infrastructure rather than just dismantling it.
I also think some sort of sanctions or penalties to the board would be appropriate, but can't imagine that working in the real world.
@EI3JDB @andrewmelder
I agree in principal, but real life is rarely so straight forward. The idea of an appointed receiver would certainly head off a lot of problems and loopholes, but I suspect there would be a lot of value in saving the corporate infrastructure rather than just dismantling it.
I also think some sort of sanctions or penalties to the board would be appropriate, but can't imagine that working in the real world.

@msb @andrewmelder Corporate infrastructure is not the same as shareholding, otherwise takeovers would be impossible. I'm thinking of something like a takeover but at a share price of 0.

And bondholders can *** off.

@EI3JDB @andrewmelder
Not the same, but there is a strong correlation. That's why I suggested bailouts as a share purchase. If a Corp needs a bailout, the bailout should buy a controlling interest, then the sovereign fund or whatever can appoint a receiver or interim board to restructure and rescue the company. The existing BoD should also be required to freeze proportional personal assets in trust, pending resolution. If the company does fail, those assets then compensate the fund.

@msb @andrewmelder Please go back and read the Wikipedia article I linked on moral hazard. Once the taxpayers start paying for worthless shares, the shareholders who failed to hold management to account are compensated for their incompetence.

Not just principle - there are meme stock companies with P/E in centuries whose shareholders will demand compensation for trillions of dollars that don't exist.

Not a penny of taxpayer money should go to shareholders or bondholders. Find another way.

@EI3JDB @andrewmelder
I think you are misunderstanding me. I'm not suggesting that shareholders should be compensated, and by the time govt is stepping in for a bailout, shareholder value should be pennies on the dollar, and asset forfeiture seems like an reasonable incentive to keep to board in line.
Set aside the fact that a Corp should never be too big to fail in the first place.
@EI3JDB @andrewmelder the current reality is that the govt just hands out giant stacks of cash and gets nothing in return, so the bar is already pretty low.
@andrewmelder @GossiTheDog
The corps don't even matter anymore. The execs and BoD stuff their pockets, dump the assets and move on to the next dumpster in need of a good fire. Chances are it's the money from the last dumpster fire they walked away from that will be laundered by VC into the next acquisition anyway.
@GossiTheDog to be unnecessarily fair to that guy, they did it, and became legends (cautionary tale)
@GossiTheDog @xssfox as opposed to how they look today, which is DEFINITELY different >_>
@GossiTheDog This may be remembered as the era when things barrelled heedlessly over cliffs and no one seemed to know how to stop them. Is this how 1929 felt?
@CassandraVert @GossiTheDog No idea, but this is definitely how the real estate bubble felt in 2006-07.
@CassandraVert @GossiTheDog here's #JohnKennethGalbraith describing what a future #boom will look like, in his 1955 book 'The Great Crash of '29.'

@CassandraVert @GossiTheDog I scroll for 30 seconds, and a perfect example appears in my feed:

https://me.ns.ci/@hnbot/116763958259155283

hnbot (@[email protected])

DOJ claims xAI's gas turbines are a matter of 'national and energy security' ---- - 2 hours ago | 14 points | 6 comments - URL: https://techcrunch.com/2026/06/16/doj-claims-xais-unpermitted-gas-turbines-are-a-matter-of-national-economic-and-energy-security/ - Discussions: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48565429 - Summary: The Department of Justice has sided with xAI in a lawsuit filed by the NAACP seeking to halt the company's use of dozens of unpermitted natural gas turbines at its Memphis data centers. In a court filing, the DOJ argued that shutting down the turbines would threaten American national, economic, and energy security, claiming xAI's Grok model supports mission-critical military operations. xAI contends that the 57 trailer-mounted turbines are exempt from Mississippi air pollution regulations for one year. However, the NAACP and the Southern Environmental Law Center argue their use violates federal law, as the units qualify as stationary sources. The groups say the already heavily polluted region has suffered worsened air quality since the centers began operating, with increased levels of harmful pollutants like PM2.5, formaldehyde, and nitrogen oxides linked to serious health risks. Since last year, the number of turbines has more than doubled. Now a division of SpaceX, xAI plans to purchase an additional $2.8 billion worth of gas turbines over the next three years, including at least $2 billion in mobile units.

NS中文嘟嘟 Mastodon中文社区
@morgan @GossiTheDog That's the thing. People talk about booms like Galbraith, as a phenomenon of the rational market, but booms don't happen without the government giving a big push.

@GossiTheDog lol 'AI is the Fyre Festival of technology marketing' is a good take.

I like a good music festival, just like many of the underlying technologies behind "AI" could do amazing things, in the right hands.

@GossiTheDog it looks like you're attempting a Fyre Festival, let Ai assist you with burning this place to the ground!

@GossiTheDog kinda like how the US govt is being run at the moment.

folks with no idea what they’re supposed to be doing, let alone how to do anything, but hey, let’s just shut this part down and fire this group and wow! that was fun! let’s do more of that!

@GossiTheDog Please sooner than later. I am sick of this whole AI shit.

@GossiTheDog Reminds me of The Big Short, when they visit the empty bank offices after the crash.

"What did you expect we'd find?"
"Grown-ups..."

@GossiTheDog Ed Zitron call them "Business Idiots" and it's hard to disagree
@GossiTheDog at this point it could be all of them at the same time and it would seem like nothing out of the ordinary

@GossiTheDog

Every slack channel: Hey Luigi, it's Luigi. How's Luigi doing on that sprint that Luigi's team is waiting on? Great! I'll let Luigi know.

@GossiTheDog
The best outcome is a prompt footgun so the endless hype cycles are rationalized
@GossiTheDog This company should be named and shamed, though.

@AimeeMaroux @GossiTheDog

If it happens, it'll be all over the news.

TBF, I was probably already boycotting them for being American.

@GossiTheDog From my observations many (but of course not all) of the reductions have in fact very little to do with AI. It's just a convenient scapegoat, or it comes later, brought by whoever is left and trying to survive with same workload handled by a smaller team. Saying you're successful deploying AI and need less people as a result looks better than admitting overinvestments. Employees also often don't understand market conditions changing and their division numbers no longer adding up when the company as a whole has resources to invest into AI.
@Jarek @GossiTheDog Employees understand business better than executives. Many of these layoffs will fire key revenue or system bearing teams because executives want a percentage of people fired and don't understand what work is meaningful for the business
@GossiTheDog This rush to replace workers with a (coming any day now) amazing genAI system feels roughly like basing health care decisions on the assumption that a cure for cancer is coming next year.
@GossiTheDog It's like the way the Segway completely changed transportation in cities and NFTs forever altered the very concept of intellectual property.
@mattblaze @GossiTheDog There's no need to do anything to improve public transport because cars will be driving themselves by 2018.

@mattblaze @GossiTheDog it really is another form of premillenial dispensationalism nonsense.

Sunnyvale, California blocked critical improvements to public transit in the city because autonomous cars were just around the corner. (And poor people didn't deserve salvation, er, public transit.)