Despite executive warnings about AI replacing workers, only 75 job cuts were explicitly tied to AI implementation out of 286,679 layoffs this year. The real story is more complex.
Editorial Standards, does a lot of talking about the ethics of their journalists but when I check, most articles are simply attributed to “GazeOn Team” or Eli Grid, https://x.com/eligrid00, account created June 2025 with no posts and what could easily be an AI generated image
More debunking than this deserves, honestly. It’s AI shill garbo
I’ve noticed that 99% of users on Lemmy instances are extremely fearful of AI and lack the courage to accept reality. They are simply not willing to acknowledge that this is the era of AI. Instead of using AI to discover new opportunities, they remain in denial.
Secondly, regarding GazeOn, you should verify the news, stats, and facts mentioned on the site from the internet. Only if they are incorrect should you raise concerns.
Uh, sure, so long as you define an “era” as “a period wherein a bunch of C-suites wet themselves over unproven tech.” I hope you realize that something having a lot of money behind it for a few years isn’t indicative that it’s about to revolutionize the world. There are plenty of near-useless things that had lots of excitement behind them, and still didn’t go anywhere.
I’ve seen what GenAI and LLMs can do. It’s a magic trick; it looks impressive, but for almost every possible use case just isn’t helpful, and unfortunately for all of us, the magicians (i.e. OpenAI et al) are douchebags on top. This is not tech worth advocating for.
gazeon.site articles keep getting posted, what is this source? Seems to be mostly a biased, pro-AI rag.
Distrust 😠
More debunking than this deserves, honestly. It’s AI shill garbo
I’ve noticed that 99% of users on Lemmy instances are extremely fearful of AI and lack the courage to accept reality. They are simply not willing to acknowledge that this is the era of AI. Instead of using AI to discover new opportunities, they remain in denial.
Secondly, regarding GazeOn, you should verify the news, stats, and facts mentioned on the site from the internet. Only if they are incorrect should you raise concerns.
Uh, sure, so long as you define an “era” as “a period wherein a bunch of C-suites wet themselves over unproven tech.” I hope you realize that something having a lot of money behind it for a few years isn’t indicative that it’s about to revolutionize the world. There are plenty of near-useless things that had lots of excitement behind them, and still didn’t go anywhere.
I’ve seen what GenAI and LLMs can do. It’s a magic trick; it looks impressive, but for almost every possible use case just isn’t helpful, and unfortunately for all of us, the magicians (i.e. OpenAI et al) are douchebags on top. This is not tech worth advocating for.