There's absolutely someone in every big company except the biggest tech companies in the world looking at spend these days because of exactly what you said. The models are good now which means people use them a lot more which means money is flying out the door more than ever before (and the impact on the businesses hasn't shown up yet as you might notice in the earnings of any business that isn't a frontier AI company)
The root problem: At every company, there is always more work that could be done, but there is not always more work that would increase profits.
Existing corporate command and control has optimized for people control, because people cost money and performed work. Control their assignments, and you control costs and what's worked on.
Widespread unmetered AI turns this on its head, because suddenly each employee is directing their own work and the AI spend that comes with it.
F.ex. Bob in accounting may think it's a brilliant idea to rebuild Lotus 1-2-3.
That may help Bob, but 10x'ing Bob's spreadsheet output doesn't change the company's profitability, because it wasn't a limiting factor. It was to Bob, but not to the company's revenue generators.
Increasing AI spend without profitability improvements is a symptom that C2 is failing (or was insufficient to begin with).
Seen through a charitable "CEOs know what the fuck they're doing" lens, the preemptive layoffs are about forcing AI efficiency gains in areas CEOs expect them: instead of allowing those departments' remaining employees to build their own apps, they're forced to deploy AI to cover for their missing 3 team members.
Unfortunately, the layoffs were executed before there were solid results about which departments could benefit from AI use (and without a plan for continuity of institutional knowledge), so... we'll see.
I mean, the layoffs we are going through right now are patently due to the high cost of AI buildouts and transitions. Meta is taking on significant debt for the first time in a long time to continue their build out plans as AI components have spiked in price.
I get what you're saying about how every employee becomes a liability when they are let loose with an AI, and totally agree. But I think the layoffs have a much more financial root because they are so widespread across so many companies and even industries (not just tech)
My point about layoffs is that with widespread AI adoption and without department-targeted layoffs, a company risks their AI spend disappearing into the void.
Layoffs + access to AI forces most of that AI use to make up for the layoffs.
Which is a pretty shitty way to burn your employees out... but it has a method.
(Also, I'd say AI infra companies vs everyone else are apples to oranges. This point would be more applicable to a non-AI infra company that's paying for AI use rather than AI infra capital)
An alternative strategy would be to stack insane amounts of cash while every other competitor is blowing theirs, putting you in an incredible position to deploy capital whenever this bubble pops. This seems so much more obvious, to me at least. I think AI is the future but it’s far more likely than not that the current phase of the market is a bubble and unsustainable. What even has Meta produced with all this AI spend? I’m not even sure what race they’re in. It just seems like a big AGI or nothing gamble. Personally I would be watching all my competitors make that bet and laughing all the way to the bank as my financial position constantly improved relatively. A lot of your competitors are basically practising self harm right in front of you and you’re joining in? Maybe I’m the idiot who is missing something, but I just don’t get it.
That's a big risk for any market with first mover advantage / network effects.
How'd Microsoft's mobile efforts go?
Sometimes the lead quickly becomes insurmountable, so if you're sitting on a cash flow machine it's not a terrible idea to at least keep pace with new markets.
What is the risk for Meta? They will continue to be a social media company that prints money regardless. I'm arguing that they NEVER need to join the AI market, not try and jump in late.
Someone at a lower level probably a regional director, noticed that a franchise owed them a debt, took inventory from the store as payment of the debt, and when all this blew up and he realized he needs to give the inventory back, he doubled down bc otherwise he'd need to record a $200k loss on that franchise
Child abuse is not an official sanctioned thing in Mormonism. And they have officially ended the practice of polygamy (yes there was some coercion on the part of the US govt)
The other three were pretty much traits of every major traditional religion at its founding.
> Some of the mormons haven't even stopped polygamy today.
Using the term 'Mormon' to refer to the the entire family tree including splinter sects is just a recipe for confusion. Adherents to splinter sects, excluding RLDS, number in the tens of thousands compared to millions of CoJCoLDS. The problems with CoJCoLDS are damning on their own without needing to conflate facts with fringe groups.
I've heard several LDS adherents talk about these people and I get the impression that they really don't appreciate the practices or the negative media attention that the polygamists bring to their faith. It's rather out of character for each of the people I heard this from to speak ill of anybody at all so I'm pretty sure they feel strongly about it.
As an atheist I don't claim loudmouth internet "GoD iSnT ReAl ShEePlE" edgelords so I understand the frustration.
In the 1800s, when children had mining and factory jobs and didn't go to school past age 12. Trying to position that as Mormonism condones child abuse is bonkers, imo
So because children were forced to work dangerous jobs it's okay for adult religious leaders to have sex with them? I'm not sure I follow that.
You should research polygamy in the mainline (Brighamite) sect if you haven't already. One of the last marriages to the the mormon prophet Lorenzo Snow was to a 15 year old. Snow was 57 at the time. This was not normal despite any assertion about children working.
Who was considered an adult changed over time as our society changed. When there were no schools, most labor was physical, etc. then puberty was often seen as the natural line between children and adults because a 14-15 year old could have all the attributes and adult had: job, income, status, etc. As we moved to a society where school was mandatory till 18 (and now nearly till 22), our attitudes about when people become adults also changed. Now we are at a point where a 20-30 year old adult being with an 18 year old is seen as taboo, even though all are adults, this is largely because as a society we have moved to a point where childhood has extended from 18 now until one is secure in career and finances (mid 20s).
I'd still maintain that marrying with large age gaps isn't child abuse, and when you claim child abuse is condoned by the Mormons you know what people assume vs what it actually is. You are just trying to be inflammatory.
Are children more abused by Mormons? I find it highly unlikely just considering on average they are wealthier than other religious groups and poverty and child abuse are highly correlated
It's more like a combination of factors that make child abuse more prevalent: lack of access to the outside world ("we are in the world but not of the world"), a strict patriarchal hierarchy in the home that puts children at the bottom, endorsement by the church of physical punishments, etc.
So you just falsify data to waste people's time? I think you are just guessing. Or protecting your own distate for people who have a different lifestyle than you.
you can't just say "mormons have a higher incidence of abuse because patriarchy" - thats a fundamentally lazy statement. There is abuse in/out of religious households. Go look at the demographics if you don't understand it (hint: the #1 abuser of children is women). Time taken away from dishonest and lazy arguments (and bigotry) is not wasted.
The problem of child sex abuse in Mormonism is magnified by several factors. The community is very tight-knit and insular. Mormons believe that God directly guides their leaders. This leads to mental compartmentalization and slowness to recognize abuse to start with. When it is recognized, there is an extremely strong culture of handling grievances internally through the Priesthood hierarchy. Reports will go to the bishop, not secular authorities. The perspective is a bit skewed to begin with because it is normal and expected for Mormon bishops to ask youth (11 yo and up) explicit questions about their sex lives in private one-on-one "worthiness interviews". The "marching orders" that bishops (the equivalent of priests or pastors) follow (the Church Handbook of Instructions) are primarily designed to protect the church and its reputation. In places where the Mormon church has political power, it can even extend to law. For instance, bishops/clergy are exempted from mandatory reporting in Utah. Bishops are specifically instructed to _not_ report abuse to authorities. Instead they are to "call the hotline" (the Kirton McConkie law firm), where are advised on how to protect the abusers so that the church doesn't incur financial risk or negative publicity. The Mormon church is very centralized and hierarchical compared to many other churches, which means the official policy of cover-up is endemic.
The Mormon Stories (John Dehlin) and Radio Free Mormon podcasts have a lot of documentation of this. The first link below is one of the most important and has a lot of written content as well.
Look into Sam Young, whom the church excommunicated because he campaigned for ending the policy of asking teens and preteens sexually explicit questions in personal worthiness interviews.
The Mormon church was also intimately involved with Boy Scouts, so basically all of the Boy Scout problems overlapped and combined with the issues above.
I agree that CSA exists in the mormon community. just want some kind of evidence that it in any way exceeds any other population. If you point out that any other group, e.g. illegal immigrants, commit crimes, you are labeled as racist. but it's strange there is no <blank>-ist when you do it. why is that?
I make a thorough and well cited post, and get this zero-effort trolling in response? The Mormon central corporation has a dedicated legal hotline specifically for advising clergy how to prevent child sexual abuse from being reported to the police. Since uou can't distinguish this from racism, I'm done here.
Similarly, even if I fail to see the link between my previous comment and your question. Israel is a settler-colonial project whose ultimate goal is the creation of a Jewish ethno-state where Palestine once stood. Logically, it requires the displacement/murder of the current Palestinian population. POSIWID
It can be a religion in its beliefs and a cult in its practices and that's exactly what's going on -- especially since it's Utah that we're talking about...
I have very close Mormon and ex-Mormon friends and have dealt with lots of Scientologists via community involvement in music and science fiction...there is no difference.
A married couple that are friends of mine had minor questions of faith and their entire large extended families with immediate no-contact. It was bitter, brutal and painful even as a bystander seeing it happen in real time. Their young children were cut off as well and their families hounded them and made their lives miserable via institutions (police calls, anonymous complaints to their schools & jobs, etc.). The behavior was beyond the pale and this couple are literally the nicest, most loving and reasonable people that I have ever met.
They switched to a different Christian denomination and raised their kids that way and couldn't be happier about their decision. In hindsight. The family wounds 20 years later are still very visible and real.
The BAM case is certainly instructive, it's not one or two bad mormon apples but a whole rotting orchard. From the owners and their employees to the police.
It's good that you're friends made it out of the cult.
If it is, it's certainly not because it had a charismatic leader who condoned polygamy. That is basically every major monotheistic religion in the world.
It's hard to buy that this is the sole reason. All the facts are out there and were out there before the election. The number one issue people cited in election polls was the economy. And Trump had a well stated economic policy that decades of knowledge of economics has shown us is a bad idea.
Ultimately voters run the US. It's our responsibility to do the research and make an informed decision. Propaganda has existed forever. You can't ban all propaganda, so it's hard for me to not still point the finger at the people who voted for this
It's due to the jagged edge of AI experience. Because it's not deterministic the results don't play out deterministically (e.g. similar scenarios will have different and potentially drastically different results)
I'm in a big tech company everyone has heard of and we have seen a huge spike in incidents which correlates with how much new code is shipped due to AI. Perhaps it's to AI's credit or our engineers' credit that the spike is relatively 1:1 with the spike in new code.
It's causing problems in all parts of the business and leadership's answer is that we must use AI to make fixing incidents faster and automated rather than assess whether we should be shipping enormous amounts of buggy code every day...
I have a very very opposite experience in a large company where everyone shits code all over parts of the codebase they don't understand with AI assistance.
We have had outages increase in tandem with lines of code shipped and outages are getting more and more severe. Yes we have improved much old code, deleted more old code, can automate code modernization, can better diagnose issues, have more options for mitigations, etc.
But all that has not offset the sheer magnitude of code being shipped which no one really understood.
We are not rapidly getting to that stage with LLMs and frankly it's hilarious that you are claiming so.
For anything other than Greenfield, new code projcets without dependencies and conventions and connections to other proprietary code, it has to be reviewed. Even for that case it's not good to not review code
Yeah it’s a sad state. But it’s also not worth putting oneself in harm’s way. Report it to the state authorities (not all of them are crooked). Or try another jurisdiction, like the local police.
reply