It's really hard to know how much of this is because of AI, and how much of it is because of reduced skills due to COVID era education policies. Then there is this factor cited in the article:

> "Gen Z is prioritizing flexible working, job stability and work-life balance—something the tech industry may not be able to offer—so they’re applying to roles in different industries. ”

Half the articles are saying that young people are using AI more efficiently than old people. More data is needed before reaching the conclusion stated by the headline.

I've a complicated history here. As a Brit growing up in the 1970s when the unions made life miserable with power cuts and high inflation because of their demands, I was not a fan. Yet by 2000 I was a union representative following my public sector employer's attempt to enforce massive pay cuts on some staff as a result of a 'job evaluation' exercise. I joined at that point. A few years later the existing rep moved to a new job outside the IT section and I got the gig.

On a good day unions can ensure the better operation of the firm. They enable concerns to be transmitted upwards and challenges raised. Unfortunately too often they get too powerful, start to throw their weight around, and do things that are destructive of the firm in the long term. I had opportunities to be obstructive for the sake of it - but resisted. But I did challenge crass behaviour to good effect at times.

The IT industry didn't need unions because the demand for our skills meant that we could easily move on. Now it's getting tougher and firms will be tempted to bully staff because they don't have an easy alternative: 'Unpaid overtime, unpaid on call time, etc. etc. So - given the option - join. Use the power wisely.

I'm retired now - and very grateful I'm not facing this crisis. Best of luck!

> Schulman tells Fortune Gen Z also has an advantage: that tech corporations can see them as fresh talent that "can just break the rules and leverage AI to a much greater degree without the hindrance of years of bias."

The alternative interpretation is - older workers have a more realistic view of what AI actually can and can't do, and thus are more aware that the higher-ups' AI usage goals are full of crap. Gen Z, on the other hand, doesn't know any better.

"you're pretty established in your career, you have skills that you know cannot yet be disrupted by AI,"

OTOH, if your inexperienced, incompetent, incomprehensible, and/or inconsistent, AI does all of that well and you can be replaced.

What if the workforce is dwindling because instead of getting proper jobs GenZ are only interested in pointless jobs like being influencers, streamers, gamers?

TL;DR - if it can't provide consistent rersults nor be held responsible, "AI" will never replace humans.

E

Long version:

LLMs regurgitate previously spewed stuff (including from other LLMs) which they pretend to analyze.

Unfortunately this analysis yields inconsistent responses, so an LLM's answer to YOU may be different

than its answer to me. Further, sometimes they just create fiction our of nothing, which we RATIONALIZE

and PRETEND is "hallucination."

Software algorithms do not hallucinate. Software algorithm

Look, I'm with everyone that the AI stuff is absolute hype, but when I started my career as an engineer, there were so many mundane jobs that grads did. I remember doing PCB layout for test jigs for quite a while - it was mostly pretty braindead, loading in component pinouts and then laying out tracks. But it's a job that needed to be done and in the process, you learnt a lot about the product development process and became integrated into the company.

Those sorts of jobs are either outsourced or automated (