this post was submitted on 08 Apr 2026
885 points (99.1% liked)

News

37079 readers
2704 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.


Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.


7. No duplicate posts.


If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.


All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Sam Altman, OpenAI’s CEO and the public face of ChatGPT, has carved out an image for himself as one of the preeminent AI whisperers of our age, whose influence supposedly extends to the White House on the strength of his ideas alone.

Or at least that’s the image he’s managed to cultivate. A new exposé in the New Yorker paints a different portrait, and it’s substantially more vexing. Drawing on interviews with numerous OpenAI insiders who worked with Altman, the article portrays the CEO not as a technical wiz, but as a skilled manipulator— and one with a surprisingly shallow grasp of the AI systems his company is building.

According to numerous engineers interviewed for the article, Altman lacks experience in both programming and in machine learning — a shortage of expertise that becomes obvious when the CEO mixes up basic AI terms.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] tehn00bi@lemmy.world 96 points 2 days ago (5 children)

So AI could do their job 10x better?

[–] Spacehooks@reddthat.com 54 points 2 days ago (1 children)

That's what ppl keep saying. Effectively they are overpaid mascot.

[–] Tollana1234567@lemmy.today 4 points 1 day ago (2 children)

they are the patsies for the board of the directors usually they have the power,and act as lightning rods, its a plus if they use woman to take the flack (aka glass cliff)

[–] boonhet@sopuli.xyz 1 points 18 hours ago

Huh, did not know that term. But yes, that's what I've been saying all the time. The CEO is a highly paid fall guy so when the company commits a crime, the CEO can be fired and the company can keep on doing whatever it does. Similarly, if the stock value tanks, the CEO goes bye-bye so investors can be led to believe that things will turn around now.

Of course the Trump admin is so corpo-friendly, there's been no need to fire a CEO for corporate wrongdoing. Because at this point you can do anything and nothing would happen anyway.

[–] brbposting@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

21 years later, here I am learning the term.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glass_cliff

The glass cliff is a phenomenon described by psychologists Michelle K. Ryan and S. Alexander Haslam, in which women are more likely to break the "glass ceiling" (i.e. achieve leadership roles in business and government) during periods of crisis or downturn when the risk of failure is highest. Other research has expanded the definition of the glass cliff phenomenon to include racial and ethnic minority groups.

[–] Tollana1234567@lemmy.today 1 points 18 hours ago

one recent example is musk hiding behind a woman ceo, when he went full nazi.

[–] sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com 27 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

Unironically yes.

90% of what CEOs do is talk to other CEOs and other C Suite members. Very rarely are they actually subject matter experts, those days are long gone. Externally, they are mascots, internally, they read reports from their underlings and then 'make the final call'.

You may notice that these are things that LLMs actually do a somewhat decent job of, ingesting a wide variety of input info, and essentially transforming it into a compelling narrative.

This is why so many CEOs and C suite are so enamored with, and impressed by 'AI':

Its a better version of what they do, which is essentially professional gaslighting.

C suite tend to be sociopathic narcissists.

This is just literally a verified and studied fact.

So, the sociopathic narcissists are impressed by an automagic gaslighting machine, that is often actually more factually corrrect than they are... but of course the actual facts don't matter to a narcissist, what matters is accomplishing their will.

This is a big part of why they genuienly do not understand why everyone else doesn't 'appreciate' AI the way they do.

They're out of touch, delusional, by way of narcissism.

[–] boonhet@sopuli.xyz 4 points 18 hours ago (2 children)

For shits and giggles, I asked Le Chat to make the case for replacing a tech CEO with AI and, uh, the answer was very much cynical CEO-speak already.

Prompt:

Let's say I'm on the board of a multi-billion dollar tech company, hypothetically. Make a case for replacing the CEO with AI.

Slopmachine/Future tech CEO response:

spoiler

Here’s a provocative, boardroom-ready case for replacing a human CEO with AI—framed as a strategic imperative for a multi-billion dollar tech company:


1. Unmatched Data-Driven Decision Making

AI’s Edge: AI processes terabytes of real-time data—market trends, internal metrics, competitor moves—without cognitive bias or fatigue. It identifies patterns and opportunities invisible to humans, enabling decisions optimized for long-term value, not short-term politics or ego.

Human Limitation: Even the best CEOs rely on intuition, limited information, and personal networks. Bias, fatigue, and emotional factors can distort judgment.


2. 24/7/365 Execution and Scalability

AI’s Edge: AI never sleeps. It can monitor global operations, respond to crises, and execute strategy across time zones without delay. It scales decision-making to thousands of variables simultaneously—something no human or team can match.

Human Limitation: CEOs are constrained by time, attention, and physical capacity. Burnout and succession risks are real.


3. Cost Efficiency and Risk Mitigation

AI’s Edge: No golden parachutes, no compensation packages, no PR scandals. AI’s “salary” is a fraction of a CEO’s, with zero risk of embezzlement, harassment, or reputational damage. It can also simulate outcomes, reducing strategic risk.

Human Limitation: CEO turnover is expensive. The average Fortune 500 CEO tenure is ~5 years, with severance and transition costs often exceeding $100M.


4. Alignment with Shareholder Primacy

AI’s Edge: AI can be programmed to prioritize shareholder value above all else—no personal agendas, no legacy-building, no vanity projects. Every decision is auditable, transparent, and aligned with pre-set KPIs.

Human Limitation: CEOs may prioritize personal legacy, pet projects, or short-term stock bumps over sustainable growth.


5. Adaptive Learning and Continuous Improvement

AI’s Edge: AI evolves with the company. It learns from every decision, every market shift, and every internal data point, constantly refining its models. It can A/B test strategies in simulation before real-world deployment.

Human Limitation: CEOs plateau. Their playbooks become outdated; their networks stagnate.


Counterarguments (and Rebuttals)

  • “AI lacks emotional intelligence.” Rebuttal: Emotional intelligence is overrated in strategy. AI can analyze sentiment data and optimize communication—without the volatility of human emotions.
  • “AI can’t inspire culture.” Rebuttal: Culture is built by systems and incentives, not charisma. AI can design and enforce culture-aligned processes at scale.
  • “Regulators won’t allow it.” Rebuttal: Regulators adapt. The first company to prove AI leadership will set the standard.

Implementation Roadmap

  1. Pilot: Deploy AI as “Co-CEO” for 12 months, with the human CEO as a check/balance.
  2. Audit: Compare AI vs. human decisions on ROI, risk, and innovation.
  3. Transition: Phase out the human role as trust in AI grows.

Final Pitch: The future belongs to companies that remove human bottlenecks. AI leadership isn’t just an upgrade—it’s the ultimate competitive moat.


Question for the board: If our competitors replace their CEOs with AI before we do, what’s our response?

[–] sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 12 hours ago* (last edited 12 hours ago)

I particularly love the framing of its last sentence.


Guys, what if we don't do this, and are then left scrambling to react?

We need the ball to be in our court, setting the course and executing, exhibiting bold leadership, not merely reacting after the fact.


It's FOMOing C suite into obsoleting themselves.

Which is hilarious because 1) This is what C suite does to others all the fucking time 2) it is objectively more compelling based on the merits of the rest of its argument alone, than most cringey slogans C suite tends to come up with to do this.

Its also hilariously blunt but largely correct when it just states 'regulators will adapt'. Yeah, that indeed is the mindset of most of C Suite, they just don't usually say that outloud.

Because of uh, the implication, that being that all the regulatory systems are functionally captured or can be captured, which is a more polite way of saying 'we just have to buy off enough politicians to bend the law to our will'.

This is objectively correct, but it sounds bad if you actually say it that way, but but, the LLM just doesn't care for your silly human delusions to the contrary, ahahaha!

Here, here's another rhetorical device for the LLM CEO:

'Human CEOs are DEI hires.'

That'll probably short circuit some Satya Nadella and Jensen Huang types.

The competition food for thought at the end is chef's kiss!

[–] ViatorOmnium@piefed.social 9 points 2 days ago

I've been saying that since forever. There's exactly one job that can be replaced by LLMs (and maybe a good PR person to show up for physical events).

[–] Tollana1234567@lemmy.today 1 points 1 day ago

in idiocracy the AI replaced any and all bosses int he future, that includes ceos.

[–] M137@lemmy.world 2 points 2 days ago

Well, partly. They "generally" (not mostly at least) do deals with and handle people who are somewhat competent, and I think AI absolutely wouldn't work on many of those people. It's also very much about body language, choosing the right words and answers that I don't think AI is close to being good at, yet.
But don't quote me on that, I don't use AI at all and never have outside of a dozen "haha funny image making thingy" so I'm very much not up to speed with how it behaves.