AI hype is exactly what I'm talking about.
I imagine if you demonstrate that you can have AI agents as viciously competitive COOs, CFOs, and CTOs, who never need time off, never sleep, it would be something that would set Wall Street on fire.
However, I could see the issue of AI 'hallucinations' being a non-issue in this domain because many in C-Suite positions have been 'hallucinating' for decades.
A company as a something like a collection of guilds coordinated by AI facilitators would be really fascinating.
We can have a funding agent provision an agent-based board as well. What's the point of a board that can't react to real-time market information 24x7x365?
The cynicism about AI's capabilities is well understood, we're at the peak of the hype cycle. People are selling AI across the board, but the reality will fall short of the sales pitch in innumerable ways across the board whether that be programmer productivity or anything else.
Then there's the meta cynicism about the sales pitches of AIs, reinforced my CEOs speaking to wall street about how AI will enable staff reductions. The rank and file is understandbly very angry about this, coupled with the understanding by technical folks that AI is far from being able to replace the function of actual deep-thinking humans. This is when the temptation to minimize the value of executives and "call their bluff" comes in. But here is where you need a dose of reality. Executives aren't stupid as you think, they don't get paid what they do for no reason, and despite the bad and anti-humanitarian decisions they make in the name of shareholder, they actually can't be replaced by AI. Both executives and boards understand this and so it's not really a topic of discussion. You are free to disagree with this of course, but at some point its just toothless wishful thinking.
I agree, but I think the reason they get paid what they do isn't because they're highly skilled (not to say they don't have skills, but those skills are mostly good ol' boys networking and the ability to do basic analysis), but rather because they're part of an insular class that protects its own. However, they're expensive and inefficient, and if we're going to practice honest capitalism then the first group to rip that bandaid off and automate away their (mostly) dead weight actually will be competitively superior to the backwards holdouts, and they will proceed to dominate the market.
This is of course if we're practicing actual capitalism and not a dressed-up form of neo-feudalism.
> but the reality will fall short of the sales pitch in innumerable ways across the board whether that be programmer productivity or anything else
Remains to be seen. We are with AI where the web was in 1996, when plenty of trusted thought leaders were sagely telling us that the web was just a place for glorified brochures.
Pick two.
