Company cuts costs by replacing 60-strong writing team with AI

midian182

Posts: 9,944   +128
Staff member
A hot potato: CEOs, bosses, and the those who make the technology love to assure people that artificial intelligence isn't going to replace everyone's jobs; it will merely augment them – working alongside humans to make life easier. Yet we keep hearing stories like the one about a writer whose employer fired his 60-person team and replaced them with an AI.

A writer using the pseudonym Benjamin Miller told the BBC that his company wanted to use AI to cut costs in early 2023. He led a team of more than 60 writers and editors who published blog posts and articles to promote a tech company that packages and resells data.

The new workflow involved feeding headlines into an AI model that would generate an outline based on the title. The writing team would then create articles based on these ideas, rather than coming up with their own, with Miller editing the final pieces.

That might sound like the definition of AI working alongside humans, but things inevitably changed.

It wasn't long before bosses decided that ChatGPT should write the articles in their entirety, leading to most of Miller's team being fired. Those who were left had the task of making the chatbot's text sound more human-like.

Eventually, Miller was the only human employee left on the team. The task of making AI-generated content sound like it came from a human was down to him alone.

"All of a sudden I was just doing everyone's job," he said. "It was more editing than I had to do with human writers, but it was always the exact same kinds of edits. The real problem was it was just so repetitive and boring. It started to feel like I was the robot."

Several months later, the company decided that not even Miller was needed. The ironic twist in the story is that the best work he could find was at a tech firm called Undetectable AI, which builds software to make AI writing harder to identify.

Miller's final comment on the matter will likely resonated with those who believe in Dead Internet theory. "I contributed to a lot of the garbage that's filling the internet and destroying it," he said. "Nobody was even reading this stuff by the time I left because it's just trash."

Despite the hallucinations, questionable quality, and public anger at its use, more companies are using generative AI to replace humans. Very few positions are 100% safe, with everyone from software engineers and IT technicians to call center agents and administrators potentially at risk. It's led to calls for a universal basic income to help alleviate the impact on society as a whole.

Permalink to story:

 
This is human nature. We use the tools for good and for bad. It is sad that creating spam content has become so simple and cheap. Hopefully reputable sites will continue to exist so we can filter our information by source and those that use internet data in order to train AI will do the same, otherwise AI will poison itself.
 
If people keep getting fired and replaced by Ai, who are these companies going to sell their products to if there aren't enough people with jobs to afford them...
looking at the graph in the article, the medical specialists will be the ones with a work.
But then, who will be able to pay them?:D

AI is destroying internet as a source of information as the information quality falls to the bottom. But that's ok. All the hype bubbles are going to fall, eventually. It was something new for older generations and an distraction from everyday reality. But this is a everyday reality for our youth, and I do hope they will want to be distracted from it by meeting people in real life, reading books, and keep mind safe from those artificial endorphin.
 
Need to use some proofing tools or some AI to review the grammar in the article lead. Read this out loud:

“ CEOs, bosses, and the those who make the technology”
 
Well, if their writing is anything like what we now see on the news services they won''t last. New services constantly mismatch pictures to stories, have grossly poor use of wording and in some cases only post a headline with no story attached. I can only imagine how it will butcher this companies documents .....
 
IMO, if the AI content is as bad as Miller says, we can expect this AI fad not to last. People want good content, not crap generated by the latest in fads.

It seems unfortunate that the company is unable to recognize that their "AI Team" is generating crap. It will be their own fault when they lose their customer base because their new content is arguably much worse than when it was written by humans.

IMO, this is an example of the "race to the bottom" mentality in today's world. Everyone wants to make a profit and not spend anything while making that profit. The end result seems always to be cheap garbage in cheap garbage out. IMO, customers will not continue to purchase cheap garbage and there is no way this kind of thing will succeed. Ultimately, because its cheap garbage, it will fail.
 
The only stable job will be left after AI is cesspool cleaner. (This is not career advice)

 
Same thing in the 1980's with "Computers are going to take all our jobs" and then again in the 1990's with "The Internet is going to take all our jobs". But we were arguably better off after the Computer Boom of the 80's and the Internet Boom of the 90s and this will be no different

Jobs and job markets change and you either learn to change along with them or get left behind
 
The list does look pretty good. It seems that every so many decades occupations has it's moments and then fizzes out. And then there are those that never does.
 
If people keep getting fired and replaced by Ai, who are these companies going to sell their products to if there aren't enough people with jobs to afford them...
50 years ago: "if people keep getting fired and replaced by computers, who are these companies going to sell their products to?"

100 years ago: "if people keep getting fired and replaced by electric machines, who are these companies going to sell their products to?"

200 years ago: "if people keep getting fired and replaced by these looms, mills, and steam engines, who are these companies going to sell their products to?"
 
This is human nature. We use the tools for good and for bad. It is sad that creating spam content has become so simple and cheap. Hopefully reputable sites will continue to exist so we can filter our information by source and those that use internet data in order to train AI will do the same, otherwise AI will poison itself.
Why do you view this as a negative? Maybe the AI will do a better job than the writers it replaced. It never gets tired and it never gets sick or shows up late for work with a hangover.
 
I've read about some of the failures of AI in the legal field. But there are some amazing results as well. Here lawyer Adam Unikowski shows what he got when asking an AI to replicate and analyze recent US Supreme Court decisions:

In AI We Trust

And more
 
Last edited:
If people keep getting fired and replaced by Ai, who are these companies going to sell their products to if there aren't enough people with jobs to afford them...
The society will adjust. Because it was always like this. The best example is how many people were needed for farming, pretty much every peasant had to work. Now huge areas are pretty much empty with few people coming to harvest when the time is right.

Another thing is long term effect if the adjustment does not happen fast enough. At some point, the distance between rich and poor can become so shocking that every one on the poor side will demand changes. Taxes will come, and those feeling very smart with AI instead of people will find great disappointment in losing that money to taxing.

It needs to be fair. It is ok to have poor, it is ok that some people can be very rich and live in amazing houses driving luxurious cars. It is not ok when the same people having mastered the skill of paying no taxes use the system that allowed them to achieve their place in life and give nothing back.



 
Same thing in the 1980's with "Computers are going to take all our jobs" and then again in the 1990's with "The Internet is going to take all our jobs". But we were arguably better off after the Computer Boom of the 80's and the Internet Boom of the 90s and this will be no different

Jobs and job markets change and you either learn to change along with them or get left behind
Computers did take jobs from people; you don't hear about them complaining because most of them aren't alive anymore. There used to be rooms of people who did calculations, manual data entry into physical spreadsheets, and they were called calculators.
 
No rules Neoliberal Capitalism starts choking when unemployment climbs above 5-6% and goes full panic mode when it reaches 8-10% and stocks start falling along with the economy. I wonder what’s going to happen when unemployment numbers will reach into the 30% or more, pushed by AI and resulting automation.
Actually I don’t wonder at all. Something like the French Revolution will happen.
 
Last edited:
Computers did take jobs from people; you don't hear about them complaining because most of them aren't alive anymore.
The people who did those calculations became, after computers, accountants, computer programmers, statisticians, actuaries, and others. And the introduction of computers led to the creation of millions of new jobs -- including entire job categories which didn't even exist beforehand. Robotics and AI will be no different.

There used to be rooms of people who did calculations, manual data entry into physical spreadsheets, and they were called calculators.
Compare the standards of living between then and now. People today fail to understand that, as late as the 1960s, the average family was lucky to share one car among them, couldn't afford items like air conditioning and commercial air travel, might not have phone service, and "vegetarian meals" were common not for health reasons, but because eating meat with every meal was a luxury beyond reach.
 
Well, here is another real case. In Bulgaria, Sofia, a friend of mine was edditor in a website for agriculture. So, they also went the ChatGPT way. After doing those the articles were not true, misleading and badly written. However, the bosses decied to go that way anyhow because the search engines like the generated AI text and vice versa. This leads to getting up the ladder on the search results hence more clicks. So, no one cares about the quality of texts but the clicks, results and so on. But if people read and like this then except AI and the bosses, people's stupidity might help to this whole picture.
 
Back