I have doubts that will ever happen, but who knows?
Sales folks are highly-compensated, so even making a few of them redundant (or making existing salespeople more efficient) would be a big win for companies (Salesforce's customers).
Being in that field, they can see where LLMs would fail at it.
They can understand that you can’t just replace a sales team with LLMs.
They don’t have that for engineering…
Very different from the software dev who gets paid today for revenue that might come in in two years. (Capital cost)
The average person has no idea of how capital sees the world. A worker feels resentful if they get paid less per hour of input, a capitalist feels resentful when they get paid less per dollar of investment. The Marxist viewpoint that they conflict directly is quite wrong: operations costs can be passed on to the consumer, but a capitalist is going to have to negotiate with their investors if they are having trouble with the bang/buck ratio of their investments.
(I'd had a job go really badly. A friend of mine said my problem was "I was only getting paid a fraction of the value that I create", I said "I tried getting paid more than the value I created and it ended in tears")
My trainer at the gym introduced me to
https://patents.google.com/patent/US10245460B2/en?oq=1024546...
which sells for about $250 (worth it if you really use it.) My first instinct is that this product ought to be available for $25 on Temu if there wasn't a patent but I know from experience that if I talked to folks at TRX they'd have a good explanation of why my number is low. (e.g. TRX is in a position to pass costs on)
For all the discussion about a soft job market for devs, the fact that the last Trump administration made a tax change that puts a target on our backs comes up rarely but it is part of the explanation.
Sales will still happen with dinner and handshakes.
We can get into the nuances of advantageous tax treatment or not, but sales commissions come from somewhere and are essentially transaction costs.
