this post was submitted on 28 Jul 2026
389 points (99.5% liked)

Technology

86679 readers
2669 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] uriel238@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago)

I have a fantasy that someone tries using data driven systems to run business. They'd still need AI to do all the C-speak and top-tier sales work, but as it is upper management commonly resents their own workforce and enacts policy just to be vindictive.

Imagine a game company that didn't crunch because it knew crunching only slowed productivity and wrecked the health and morale of the dev team.

Imagine a company who didn't issue RTO mandates because it saw it's telecommuters are more productive and happier working from home.

Imagine if businesses didn't surveillance-max and micromanage their administrative clerks and fulfillment teams understanding that doing so slows them down and makes them miserable.

I don't know for certain that AI-assisted computers can run businesses and manage well, but we have countless examples of how upper management lets their feelings get in the way of maximizing profit and demonstrate incompetence and lack of adult maturity.

The bar really is that low.

[–] BarneyPiccolo@lemmy.today 6 points 5 hours ago (2 children)

It's parody right now, but as you read the article, it begins to make perfect sense that AI is far better suited to replace the responsibilities of a CEO, than the varied responsibilities of the workers, especially when the economics are taken into account. You can save millions by getting rid of workers, but there's a lot of work involved in replacing all those jobs. Or you can save millions by getting rid of a single CEo, and you only have to replace one job.

At some point, somebody is going to offer this service for real, and companies are going to use it.

[–] BilliamBoberts@lemmy.world 2 points 1 hour ago

They are the most expensive piece of the workforce by far, especially when you consider their relative measurable productivity

[–] explodicle@sh.itjust.works 2 points 4 hours ago

They went mask-off when working from home saved money vs return to office. It's about power.

[–] Honytawk@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

Sorry guys.

It might sound like a dream, but these replacements aren't happening as long as the shareholders can't blame the AI when the company does something bad. They don't want to end up in prison.

[–] Landless2029@lemmy.world 4 points 2 hours ago

Yeah. Just look at all the CEOs currently in prison!

[–] HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world 7 points 6 hours ago

Right. Parody.

[–] tigermountain@lemmy.world 20 points 7 hours ago (3 children)

I've read that one of the jobs most suited to takeover by AI are CEOs.

[–] floofloof@lemmy.ca 15 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

LLMs are bullshit machines. I dont see how there's any question.

[–] T00l_shed@lemmy.world 3 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

Yes, but can they "synergise, the verticals, while hyperspeeding through deepdiving outside of the box thinking?" I think NOT

[–] mirshafie@europe.pub 5 points 7 hours ago (2 children)

Sounds like you're using a 2025 harness on your CEO bot bro

[–] T00l_shed@lemmy.world 1 points 5 hours ago

You are really a thought leader, I'll need to ping some ideas off of you to help move the needle. But we will have to circle back. We can take this offline.

[–] BeMoreCareful@lemmy.world 1 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

All of these ideas are literally the best things I ever heard.

[–] T00l_shed@lemmy.world 2 points 5 hours ago

Thank you for your value add

[–] Passerby6497@lemmy.world 2 points 6 hours ago

I would say that doing so would mean that there's no one to hold accountable, but then I remembered the hellscape I live in where ceos don't face accountability anyways, so yeah...

[–] adhdsergio@lemmy.world 1 points 7 hours ago

I'd love that but if you marry the fecklessness of a CEO with the ruthlessness of an AI you get weekly layoffs 😂

[–] ZILtoid1991@lemmy.world 16 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

Will the AI CEOs molest AI children on an AI generated private island?

[–] Abyssian@lemmy.world 2 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 7 hours ago)

God no. They wouldn't do that, that's awful. They'll molest human children, so they can secure a large body of supporters.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 10 points 10 hours ago (2 children)

threatens

But the owners of the website have no control over the administration of business infrastructure.

Like, its all very tongue-and-cheek, but it mostly illustrates that our economic model isn't based on "efficiency" or "meritocracy". The folks calling the shots have their positions by way of inheritance, influence peddling, and state-sanctioned violence.

[–] dream_weasel@sh.itjust.works 5 points 7 hours ago

Tongue-in-cheek* otherwise yeah agreed.

[–] mriormro@lemmy.zip 1 points 6 hours ago

I think that’s what parody is.

[–] super_user_do@feddit.it 1 points 7 hours ago

It actually makes a lot of sense

[–] ViatorOmnium@piefed.social 92 points 18 hours ago (3 children)

I don't know why this needs to be a joke. Assuming the rest of the company is minimally competent and the middle managers can write clear executive documents an LLM will probably beat the average CEO just by virtue of not having moods. The only downside is that LLMs can't do in person "social networking" yet.

[–] PapaStevesy@lemmy.world 1 points 4 hours ago

And they can't tell reality from fiction, though I think that's probably true of most human ceos too.

[–] Septimaeus@infosec.pub 25 points 18 hours ago (7 children)

All true. To your question, however: until software can be named as a legal fiduciary, CEOs can only be functionally replaced. That is, a real person who can be summoned by a court has to take responsibility for whatever shit the LLM gets the company into.

[–] ViatorOmnium@piefed.social 16 points 18 hours ago (2 children)

The middle managers can take turns as the Straw CEO for legal purposes. Or maybe someone can provide Straw CEO as a Service while living somewhere with few extradition treaties.

[–] entropicdrift@lemmy.sdf.org 9 points 14 hours ago

"We have no king. We're an autonomous collective"

[–] Mouselemming@sh.itjust.works 4 points 15 hours ago

Rotate it as an "on call" role monthly among all employees. If called upon to act, the person receives CEO-level salary for the necessary hours. And they're in the running for an end-of-year bonus, to be voted on by all employees depending on the results of their actions in that role. (Splitting it between equally-valuable Acting CEOs is permissable.)

[–] SwingingTheLamp@piefed.zip 5 points 16 hours ago

Well, not quite. The corporation is a distinct legal entity, and is served a summons per se. For practical purposes of actually delivering the papers to a person, the corporation must have a designated representative. This may be anybody, and there are businesses that specialize in serving as the designated representative for perhaps hundreds of corporations. (Especially those that exist only as legal entities.) I know of one nearby me that's basically just a mailbox, even though it's listed as the address for many, many corporations.

The whole purpose of a corporate entity, as a legal concept, is to shield the directors, and officers, from personal liability. Unless personally named in a suit, a CEO almost never shows up in court. That's a job for an attorney.

[–] Master167@lemmy.world 4 points 15 hours ago

That would be the Board of directors for the company since they select the CEO or virtual equivalent. But current laws don't support bringing anything against a CEO for a company's wrongdoing. Even less for the board of directors.

[–] ApeNo1@lemmy.world 4 points 17 hours ago (4 children)

I believe the corporation itself is treated as a distinct legal entity for litigation purposes and shields officers of the company unless there are specific circumstances around any individual. I don’t think there is a legal requirement for a corporation to have a CEO. I think this just further confirms the idea of the CEO “role” being fully automated to be more than viable and a genuine costs savings. Much lower risk than relying on AI to replace skilled technical functions.

Someone with more corporate legal knowledge could provide further insight.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] NewNewAugustEast@lemmy.zip 4 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

middle managers can write clear executive documents

AI for that too. Middle management is just as bad.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 4 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

I've seen from personal experience that the only thing worse than bad middle management is no middle management.

Getting called all the way up to the VPs office to try and explain some systems architecture to a guy who only knows how to say "But why doesn't it work?!" at you over and over again is... not fun.

[–] NewNewAugustEast@lemmy.zip 2 points 9 hours ago* (last edited 9 hours ago)

Fire them too.

Or as the premise is: have the AI tell the VP. That's who gets to write those documents now.

[–] darthelmet@lemmy.world 16 points 14 hours ago (2 children)

This seems over engineered. I’m pretty sure a simple program that just replies “yeah sure” to anyone from the right department asking about something would outperform most CEOs.

[–] xthexder@l.sw0.com 11 points 9 hours ago* (last edited 9 hours ago)

The classic..

Middle-manager: We have 3 options, but only enough resources to finish 1, which one should we prioritize?

CEO: These are all great! I look forward to seeing the final version of all 3 next week.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 8 points 10 hours ago

The primary role of the CEO is to solicit cheap lending from banks. A simple program can't do that. You need a real human being at the business with another real human being who was friends with that first human being in college and who now works as a broker at a big financial institution to stamp the loan.

This is every billionaire's path to power. Not via what they know but who they know.

[–] Imgonnatrythis@sh.itjust.works 17 points 15 hours ago

Why parody? Try it.

[–] SkaveRat@discuss.tchncs.de 43 points 19 hours ago
[–] WhatsHerBucket@lemmy.world 3 points 13 hours ago

I love they had to call out it’s satire

[–] robocall@lemmy.world 11 points 19 hours ago (1 children)

Luigi had a solution for this too

[–] Leviathan@lemmy.world 1 points 5 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago)

THE solution.

Edit: just cause I didn't get on that Tesseract cool kids list; I'm saying we should execute CEOs in the street.

load more comments
view more: next ›