And when it comes time to ring out alll of the businesses that have gotten hooked, these managers will be long gone, anyway. There's no losing for them.
@cmconseils

That's the part I don't understand. If you and I can see this, why is it so hard for the execs and directors?

There have long been fads in management, but I don't think I've ever heard of one that was 1) so expensive, 2) had so little return, and 3) was actively advised against by the same people promoting it.

The guys driving this bandwagon keep telling us not to use it for anything where accuracy matters, but companies keep using it anyway. It makes zero sense to me.

No one (besides Microsoft) is asking me to use AI. I've no plans to start using it. But I think you're right. If we (workers) had been collectively bargaining for raises with every productivity gain in the last 30 years, we wouldn't have such a wealth disparity as we do.

To stop seeing my todo list as how far I'm behind, and instead see it as an infinite corridor, the rest of which just hasn't been rendered yet.

Oh, I don't really see the efficiencies either. But you can bet that if they exist they aren't benefitting workers.

I mean, I guess if you're willing to skip that part of the work it increases efficiency, but getting to bad places faster seems like a weird goal.
@cmconseils

If the benefits of AI efficiencies went to the worker, there'd be far fewer critics.

Offer me a bunch more money and we can talk.

One increases efficiency, one ... less so...