• Heikki2@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    2 hours ago

    As a US citizen, this logic need to be applied to corperations. The C_Os make all the decisions for the company, the Campany should not be held as responsible for the shitty actions of its Board. The Board should be held accountable for the companies actions be required to served by all the C_Os. I say served, I mean fines and prison time ,in all cases, as a fine is paid personally by the person and time is served aslo bu the person.

    I know fine are just a temporary for “legal fo .a price” fine should be paid to hut them so Retirement accounts are taken, future earning are taken, income from salary+bonus at time of infraction are taken, and close loops of off shore accounts

    • Rooster326@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 hour ago

      Agreed except you better not touch my extremely meager retirement account for some shit the CEO did. I will go full uno bomber.

      • Heikki2@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        9 minutes ago

        Thats where the legislation can put the lawyer talk in to address it is the personal accounts of the C_Os

  • ZILtoid1991@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    52 minutes ago

    Executives today:

    This means if we put AI somewhere in our decision making, we can no longer be held accountable.

  • Salvo@aussie.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    77
    ·
    14 hours ago

    Managers aren’t being held accountable for their management decisions either.

    “Oh, I sacked our entire workforce and sold all the company assets, so the figures will look amazing this month.”

    <one month later>

    “Oh, the figures are down this month, a golden handshake!? Thank you very much.”

    • HobbitFoot @thelemmy.club
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 hour ago

      It depends, though.

      There are cases where parts of a struggling company is worth less than the sum of its parts. At that point, the fiscally prudent option is to sell it off, either in one piece or multiple pieces. There are plenty of cases in American corporate history where the best option is to cut losses and leave a market.

      That being said, I’m surprised that private equity is still allowed to be a thing given the massive disparity shown in how a lot of financial disparity in how a lot of private equity companies run their companies against their fiduciary responsibilities to their companies’ stockholders and bondholders.

  • ruuster13@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    124
    ·
    17 hours ago

    And when computers make all management decisions, let us not forget that managers told them to do so, lest we forget whom to hold accountable.

  • xxce2AAb@feddit.dk
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    71
    ·
    16 hours ago

    Ah, from back when people still had critical thinking faculties in good working order.

        • Frezik@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          3 hours ago

          “Back in the day”, IBM was all suits the entire way up and down the ladder. They were considered the company for 1960/70s button down dress code.

          The hippie types were at MIT hacking on DEC machines.

          • thinkercharmercoderfarmer@slrpnk.net
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 hours ago

            I think that’s broadly true, but just because you work somewhere as oppressive as IBM doesn’t mean you don’t long to breathe the free air. I like to imagine some of the contributors to the IBM songbook felt trapped in their day job and grabbed at that as the only available creative outlet, and they had their own magnum opus that they were going to publish just as soon as they felt safe enough to take the leap. I can’t find any credits for the songs so maybe they did.

        • CompactFlax@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          11
          ·
          15 hours ago

          At the time the computers were kinda newfangled and they tolerated some hippies over there in research.

          The business part, well, yeah.

      • shalafi@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        14 hours ago

        IBM in 1979 was the polar opposite of hippie or liberal. You’re thinking of later, younger outfits, Pirates of Silicon Valley types. IBM was white shirt, black tie, solidly stuck in their ways.

  • LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    15 hours ago

    Let’s be honest though, most managers, maybe ~60% could be replaced by AI. If you want evidence, think of anyone who goes to meetings, and those who go to meetings all day element 90% of meetings, at minimal. Those jobs shouldn’t exist. They are what people like Bezos/Musk believe should not exist.

    Now, how does one get from being nothing, and never being in meetings to being someone making money… You can’t, unless you know someone. AI is an “American Dream” killer

  • Sundray@lemmus.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    16 hours ago

    I can only assume the very next slide said, “But having a computer make battlefield targeting decisions is A-OK!” /s

  • MalReynolds@piefed.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    13 hours ago

    Again, weapons without human in the loop needs to be against the Geneva convention, yesterday. Or articles of war , something. This is a tractable problem, that needs attention, now, It will not end well and can actually be (mostly, by honorable armies) fixed.

    • ulterno@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      3 hours ago

      Geneva convention can only be applied on the nations who are coincidentally, not going around breaking them willy-nilly.