“skills not required” but they will throw their weight around as if they have them.

"Even if AI can automate certain tasks, language like this completely destroys team morale and trust. "

That's what the parent commented on and that was my response.

I think what he said is deplorable (hence "yes and no"). However I'm speaking specifically to the premise of what the parent said around "it destroys team morale". What I'm saying is that your team's morale may not necessarily be hurt if you are a team member at a bank full of investment bankers, capital financiers, etc. if the promise to them is that many of them can make more money with AI.

I believe "dark triad" personality traits are significantly over-represented among CEOs vs. the general population. IMO it's likely that these traits are positively selected by shareholder capitalism and traditional corporate structures.

Because they live in a different world.

Considering the unethical practices done in the name of money I wouldn't be surprised that some companies would make use of slaves if it was legal to do so.

Slavery is actually legal. The 13th Amendment banning it has the explicit exception "except as punishment for a crime". Prison labor is used by a number of industries.

>Where does it stop? Slavery would be fine if only it were legal? I mean that is the logical conclusion of a lot of business efficiency thinking.

Yes. Numerous corporations use outsourced slave labor in places where it is legal, or where bribery makes it easy to look the other way. Many of the rare earth elements in your electronics were mined and the devices assembled by slave labor. Agricultural companies United Fruit Company and Nestle are notorious for teaming up with local criminal groups and kidnapping locals in various countries and running slave labor camps.

The CEO has a fiduciary duty to act in the best financial interests of the company and its investors. So if slavery were legal and the company weren’t using slaves the CEO would be in violation of that responsibility and would be thrown out by the board.

It’s best just to view these organizations and the people who run them as immoral and sociopathic money printing machines. Expecting morality is just going to disappoint you.

Because there's a severe lack of education (in the school sense) on personality disorders. I was in a relative hell for nearly a decade until I learned about the Cluster B spectrum of disorders. Once I had an answer to "what the hell was that all about," everything changed.

Ditch digging is a crap paying job that most people hate, they just need it for food and stuff. After the mechanical resource arrived, I didn't need the other nine guys and just let them go, since I didn't suddenly get 10x the business. How does that change the calculation? Should I have kept paying them until I could find them work?

Yes, I agree with Friedman that excavators are better than spoons. Could you explain why that implies that I'm a baby who opposes all labor protections?

I am far lower-value capital for tasks like digging ditches, moving things from point to point and proof reading documents than available non-human capital. Now non-human capital out performs me on many more tasks than a few years ago. I don't like it, but don't find it helpful to deny.