Are the big CEO/ultra-responsible/ultra-high-paying positions in business currently(or within the next year) threatened by AI?

Submitted by fluffy_assassins t3_124m13e in singularity

With the success of an AI CEO, could the actual CEO's and other ultra-rich executives be facing a threat to their own jobs, especially when/if share-holders see that replacing them leads to better returns? And if so, how would the CEO's be able to keep their jobs, when/if they couldn't make as much money as the AI?

Edit(link to the AI CEO): https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technology/chinese-games-company-has-an-ai-as-its-ceo-its-stock-has-risen-since/ar-AA18IyEv

36

Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

1BannedAgain t1_jdzy9uo wrote

Half the decisions made at large organizations are wrong. There’s plenty of literature on c-suite decision-failures. This means there is room for improvement

34

qepdibpbfessttrud t1_je0mii1 wrote

Peter's principle. U can't go two steps without seeing it all around in corporate world. There's a skyscraper for improvement

Fuckers slow economic growth for all of us

5

Emory_C t1_je1ipi9 wrote

>Half the decisions made at large organizations are wrong. There’s plenty of literature on c-suite decision-failures. This means there is room for improvement

GPT-4 would be very prone to hallucinate "wrong" answers as well.

Stockholders want somebody to be able to fire.

3

kantmeout t1_je1zrv3 wrote

Not to mention that AI wouldn't necessarily need to be more effective given the sheer amount of money these people make.

2

ptxtra t1_je0b8wc wrote

Everyone will think it's impossible, some small startup will do it while beating all the competition with a large margin, then big CEOs will scramble to integrate the benefits of AI management into their companies while keeping their positions. If it gets banned here, the chinese will do it.

19

homezlice t1_je055wc wrote

No. We will have humans at the top of almost all organizations for the foreseeable future. If you think having intelligent tools will force people to relinquish power you are going to be mightily disappointed.

16

fluffy_assassins OP t1_je05ghj wrote

Well, I'm wondering if the shareholders will "overthrow" the CEOs if they see that having an AI in charge will actually get them more stock value, and therefore more power.

We could see executives vs. shareholders. Although, if the executives are the main shareholders, that could be an obstacle. Could be.

Imagine a CEO seeing they will make more money if they watch the AI, than if they actively manage. They'll remove themselves from the decision-making system to get more of that green.

Edit: this is kind of a guess. I'm wondering what CEOs will do to prevent this, as I don't feel they will go out without a fight.

I'm really curious with this question HOW the executive levels will counter superior AI. It will be interesting to see.

12

homezlice t1_je09zjv wrote

OK I'll bite. First off shareholders are not the ones who directly control appointing a CEO in publicly traded companies, that goes to the board generally. The board would need a human in charge of whatever AI oversaw a company for legal reasons alone. Because otherwise who would be liable for criminal wrongdoing, taxes, etc. Companies are formed from the ground up with assumption of humans in control. Even if shareholders decided they wanted an AI in charge it just could not happen, an S Corp requires humans in the loop, at the top.

Now, an AI for sure could be running the vast majority of the day to day operations. But for an AI to actually be CEO would require unending hundreds of years of law. I don't expect it to actually happen, instead CEOs will control AI and reduce human headcount below them. Bummer I know..and maybe that will then trigger bigger economic change. But the idea that we are going to jump right to AI being considered legally human is unbelievably farfetched and unlikely.

3

czk_21 t1_je0p48f wrote

> But for an AI to actually be CEO would require unending hundreds of years of law. I don't expect it to actually happen

AI can easily learn all laws in humaan existence now, thats nonissue, problematic could be reasoning but as we can see GPT-4 scores better than 90% of people in law bar exams...

AI can also take note of markets in real time and do complicated market analysis in seconds/minutes, no human can compete

AI can make company more efficient and as bonus you wont need to pay millions to CEO, its win win

5

homezlice t1_je0tlrw wrote

You're missing my point. An AI is not a human thus cannot be a human in a legal sense which is required for it to have a position as a CEO. Does not matter at all how good a tool performs it is not covered as a human nor should it be.

1

czk_21 t1_je0vvsz wrote

you said that board of directors needs to be human, not CEO, I guess it depends on state, since it is possible in china, also even if it would be not allowed now, that can be changed...

4

homezlice t1_je19bdz wrote

A private company is going to be different I am discussing US law here. But no, it can't be changed, you need a human to be responsible at the top of an organization legally, otherwise artifical entities could spin up endless fake companies.

1

Redducer t1_je0wwh8 wrote

I am thinking intensely of the scene with the robot ambassador at the United Nations in Animatrix now.

2

fluffy_assassins OP t1_je0m0zg wrote

Sounds about right. I can only hope the powerful trend towards only influencing things in name only for legal reasons and are happy to chill on a beach or otherwise fuck right off.

1

flyblackbox t1_je234fu wrote

What about decentralized autonomous organizations run on the block chain via smart contracts? If what you’re saying is true, that traditional companies are unable to be run by AI, there will be new organizations that are able, and it will be new competition for the traditional corporate structure.

AI being considered legally human is unlikely, but isn’t more unlikely that human CEOs will be able to compete with AI leaders? Because if a novel organizational structure can be formed in order to accommodate the legal challenges presented by the limitation of personhood requirements for traditional corporations, it will outcompete.

1

homezlice t1_je2sxph wrote

If you want to change any of that you have to change how companies are formed and recognized. And I don't see any incentive for people to opt out of the loop. Especially lawyers.

1

Redducer t1_je0wiz2 wrote

Incumbent companies will surely enforce this as much as they can. Until AI operated organizations demolish them, that is.

3

homezlice t1_je2t44v wrote

I didn't say AI would not run most decisions and operations. But it will be directed and controlled by humans at the top who will benefit the most.

1

tatleoat t1_je075m7 wrote

Yeah it's a matter of time, I've said it many times before but here's how I see it playing out (warning schizoposting):

Constitutional AI gives people the opportunity to 'create' bosses with publicly available constitutions, or plain-english codes of behavior. There can be contractual obligations not to change the constitution for five years, workers get a vote, etc, the point is it can be deliberately programmed and open sourced for 1. Maximum trustworthiness, and 2. Maximum employee benefit, meaning all the money that would ordinarily be the CEOs would go to the working class.

Since AI CEOs have a built in advantage of being capable of being deliberately programmed not to be greedy, which there is HUGE incentive and ability to do so, that gives them huge advantages over human adversaries. Humans will be held back by their own greed because the money isn't efficiently being distributed through the company.

Human CEOs will be caught in a bind, the only way they can survive as CEOs is not to be greedy but if they aren't greedy that defeats the point. Any competing AI CEOs that try to be greedy will simply not be able to keep up, it's a huge advantage because it means for now they will be taking on some or all of the human workers displaced by human CEOs automation.

The only point of disruption is that human CEOs have a lot of assets, so even though AI CEOs will have the workers, will it matter if human CEOs are the ones with all the means of effective production, like factories? That's the only part I can't get my head around yet.

12

flyblackbox t1_je21mcg wrote

This prediction points to an explosion in blockchain smart contract solutions. Decentralized Autonomous Organizations directed by AI seems to be what you’re describing. The price of crypto like Ethereum is going to skyrocket if what you’re predicting takes place.

1

Moist___Towelette t1_je1pmdu wrote

I really hope the position of CEO becomes obsolete. They’ve all been fucking the rest of us with their salaries and share buybacks for way too long. Fuck them all

4

Thatingles t1_je046xe wrote

Until we have AGI there will continue to be someone at the top of most businesses, though perhaps only because they are very skilled in persuading people that they should be at the top of the business (whilst actually letting other people do the work). So no change there!

I don't think we will see replacement soon. Current AI hallucinates / is confidently incorrect far too frequently for that. But it is coming, for sure.

3

fluffy_assassins OP t1_je04t60 wrote

So, 2 years max. Got it.

I guess we have to put up with CEO's for another 2 years.

If the shareholders go on ChatGPT and ChatGPT says things that make enough sense, the CEO's are screwed.

2

No_Ninja3309_NoNoYes t1_je188qg wrote

Corruption is widespread amongst the elite. Self managed teams are not such a big deal. Most open source communities operate fine with limited leadership. The business hierarchy is based on the military, but it's not very agile. If people know what they're doing, and with good AI that should be the case, you have no need for strict discipline.

3

foobazzler t1_je2wxwa wrote

literally every job will be threatening by AI

3

fluffy_assassins OP t1_je4fiaq wrote

Yeah, I'm curious about how CEOs will fight it more than anything. Power structures are gonna flip in their heads.

1

SteakTree t1_je0737m wrote

Definitely not at present. Right now the AI we have are just tools. They aren’t self directing. There is huge gap between a LLM and AGI. If we get to the point where AGI can self direct itself and explore its universe around it, running a megacorp for humans may not be top of the list. There would be so much significant change that it would be hard to say the corporate model would even remain valid.

2

DreaminDemon177 t1_je1oywg wrote

If it's a publicly traded company, and they don't have to pay a CEO anymore and return that money to share holders, you better believe they will be fired.

2

cant-say-less-info t1_je34gcl wrote

CEO's are the media face for the board of directors

2

fluffy_assassins OP t1_je4ff2t wrote

Fine with me, but I'd love for that to be all they do. The board of directors will probably be replaced to when AI is better at profiting the shareholders...

1

cant-say-less-info t1_je4gn56 wrote

The CEO of my old company is just doing PR stuff, I don’t think they do have or usually claim to have the expertise over HOD’s. Their job is to figure out what BOD wants and BOD chose him to represent their interests. It’s a power and trust position so it may not work for many companies to rely on AI in such cases.

2

SmoothPlastic9 t1_je4aaqh wrote

Every position aside from share-holders is threatened

2

Ok_Mycologist_5569 t1_je1z6tz wrote

Elon has shown us all they do is tweet all day and make dumb decisions, so bring it on

1

CertainMiddle2382 t1_je4l8sk wrote

In most mature industries their role is to manage status quo and tune the monopoly they invariably achieved by keeping good contacts with fellow cartel members and take care of allies in gouvernement.

Their also have to maintain friendly proximity with fellow McKinsey gents in commercial banks that will finance anything that doesn’t require financing.

That is their true job, and that will remain for a little while IMO.

1

Redguard_Jihadist t1_je1ervf wrote

Lmao no. There'll always be a few humans in charge raking in most of the money.

0

Qumeric t1_je07bo2 wrote

Currently no. One of the least endangered jobs I believe.

−1

fluffy_assassins OP t1_je0m4sa wrote

Did you check out the link?

3

Qumeric t1_je0ns9w wrote

I did not check the link but I believe that I heard about this case. I think it is mostly a marketing stunt.

1

bullettrain1 t1_je10dyo wrote

I don’t think we’ll see a ceo replaced with an AI anytime soon. They’re the ones that make that decision, would you replace yourself with an AI??

−1

fluffy_assassins OP t1_je14rsp wrote

If I made $10 million a year, but having an AI do my job made me $13 million a year, and I could just chill doing whatever I wanted, I'd consider it.

And you don't have to be such a dick, this is r/nostupidquestions.

2

bullettrain1 t1_je1bv95 wrote

Sorry by the way, I mistakenly thought it was an article summary and not something a user wrote. Also didn’t realize which sub I was in. It was rude of me to use that tone and language in my first comment, your opinion is as valid as mine is.

2

fluffy_assassins OP t1_je1hcfg wrote

Ohh I've made some embarrassing comments because I thought I was in a different sub. Your points are still valid.

2

bullettrain1 t1_je1990c wrote

That implies all CEOs own the company. And it also assumes they wouldn’t keep the title and add it as a new executive position with all authority and take all the credit.

1

fluffy_assassins OP t1_je1a1b6 wrote

They wouldn't have the authority, they'd get the money and take the credit.

But the AI would have the authority and decision-making.

The CEO's "tool" would be making the decisions and that could go both ways but hey, it'd be change.

2

bullettrain1 t1_je1aiem wrote

My point is the livelihood of CEOs are not threatened by AI, opposed to everyone else. To your point - they will use it as a tool. That’s my issue with people saying “oh it will replace CEOs” , because it won’t put them out of work, it’ll make them richer

1

msabbiewoo t1_jdzsnz4 wrote

If AI can serve as a CEO, then it could potentially hold the position of President of the United States.

−3

fluffy_assassins OP t1_jdzt800 wrote

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technology/chinese-games-company-has-an-ai-as-its-ceo-its-stock-has-risen-since/ar-AA18IyEv

3

Primo2000 t1_jdzug6k wrote

I suspect this is just publicity stunt

1

fluffy_assassins OP t1_jdzw1wd wrote

The only way an AI won't make decisions better than a human is if somehow we stop it from making the decisions at all, and eventually we won't even be able to do that.

3

qepdibpbfessttrud t1_je0mubq wrote

Even ChatGPT can in many cases with its 3000 word limit and non-specialized training

Due to Peter's principle

3

fluffy_assassins OP t1_je15c3z wrote

I agree, however I do think an AI will have to be FAR superior to executives to really threaten their power.

1

Thatingles t1_je03vwo wrote

That is a spicy hot take, have you met people?

1

fluffy_assassins OP t1_je056v7 wrote

A few. I should probably touch grass more than my 2 mile daily walks, though.

2