Robots are not taking over our jobs

[Worm]

Chinese robot trying to dance like Michael Jackson falls over​

 

[Truthspeak]

The AI big brother system already there and will evolve and improve

Just a matter of time only

Especially the slaves are also complying to the acceptance of AI

 

[laksaboy]

Shameless Tiongs trying to howlian with the half-fuck robotic technology stolen from overseas.

 

[k1976]

AI isn’t paying off in the way companies think. Layoffs driven by automation are failing to generate returns, study finds​

Jake Angelo
Updated Tue, 12 May 2026 at 12:33 AM SGT
4 min read
Add Yahoo as a preferred source to see more of our stories on Google.

Add Yahoo on Google

A Gartner study found that while 80% of companies surveyed reported workforce reductions, there was no correlation to higher ROI.
(Chris Ratcliffe/Bloomberg via Getty Images)More
The ongoing dialogue regarding the ever-imminent displacement of white-collar workers by AI is predicated on the assumption that the technology will become as skilled as the very workers it threatens to displace, thereby cutting labor costs. But a new study found that’s not quite what’s playing out in many companies that have carried out AI-related layoffs.

A survey of 350 global business executives with an annual revenue of at least $1 billion by the research and advisory firm Gartner found that many have reduced their workforce irrespective of AI adoption. While 80% of those surveyed who have piloted an AI or autonomous technology have reported workforce reductions, the businesses cut jobs due to automation regardless of whether the technology was actually generating returns.

“Looking only at layoffs is shortsighted in terms of getting value from AI,” Helen Poitevin, VP analyst at Gartner and a key researcher of the study, told Fortune. “Chasing value only through headcount reduction is likely to lead most organizations down a path of limited returns.”

 

[k1976]

Similar data from a broader range of perspectives supports the conclusion that there;s a gap between AI adoption and successful implementation. Great Place to Work surveyednearly 4,000 workers across 25 countries and found that while 82% of executives said that their company provides AI tools to help them do their job better, only 48% of frontline managers and just 38% of individual contributors said the same. At typical workplaces, only 15% of employees were change enthusiasts and 35% were open to change.

The looming threat of AI automation has many employees fearing for their jobs. But a growing number of business leaders and economists are skeptical that the technology will actually spur layoffs. Apollo chief economist Torsten Slok recently argued the Jevons paradox: a 19th century theory that explained why the demand for coal increased even as steam engines became more efficient and coal became cheaper. The paradox also applies to the AI age, Slok argued, and it predicts the technology will lead to more jobs, not less.

Where companies see returns with AI implementation​

Poitevin said the companies reporting high ROI were not the same ones reporting AI-related workforce reductions. In fact, workforce reduction rates were nearly equal for those reporting higher ROI and those with smaller returns or even worsened outcomes from autonomous operations.

“That’s not where the value is,” she said of layoffs. “That’s not where the productivity gains are going to be.”


Instead, the study found companies with the highest gains were those using AI as a form of “people amplification,” implementing the technology to make workers more productive rather than outright replacing them.

 

[k1976]

But our wise man seem to be disagree de woh??

 

[eatshitndie]

it actually cost more with agentic ai as user has to pay upwards of $699 to $6.9k for tokens within a span of 6.9 weeks. take the case of microsoft. it allowed up to 6.9k engineers to use claude from anthropic for a 6.9-month sexperiment. in less than 6.9 months they blew their total budget of $3.69b meant for the year, including work with generative ai on their crappy copilot system. almost all sexpenses in the budget were on tokens from use of claude. payment went to anthropic and not circulated within ms. adding insult to injury, ms engineers prefered claude over copilot, and claude itself helped to generate more token use sexponentially bumping up demand and popularity within ms. so what did ms do? ban the use of claude and mandate all engineers to use only copilot for their work. with that, all major tech companies are designing their own ai engines and developing (or in meta’s case acquiring) their own agentic ai for revenue from clients based on tokens and generative ai for own use and keeping cost down. it will require another 6.9 months for a cost shakedown before ceos and cfos know sexactly what the fuck is going on before facing a sticker shock.

sinkie ministars, if you don’t know wtf is going on with ai and cost implications, please stfu for now. don’t push any ai agenda willy nilly without fully understanding the entire picture. even ms the progenitor of chatgpt with openai got caught with its pants down playing masak masak thinking use of “cheap”tokens with claude was within control.