So would Elven Underwear and The Hobbit Belly Band

"Somebody else will pay the salaries of our customers".

As far as I can tell the individual actors extracting more from a system that its capable to support if everybody does the same (the kind of situation Game Theory calls a Tragedy Of The Commons) always think in one of 3 ways:

• They simply don't think about systemic consequences at all, be it simply that they don't have the kind of intelligence for it or purposefully don't dig down into it because they don't want to think about consequences.
• They expect the "system" (i.e. somebody else, maybe everybody else) will make up for it so it's fine if they take more from it than the put back in, as illustrated in my first paragraph.
• They're aware of what the commulative impact of their actions can or even will have in the future, but they think they themselves and their families will be alright and screw everybody else - essentially that if they can get ahead enough they can ride the wave whilst it crashes.

The same kind of thinking also applies to Ponzi Schemes (like the current AI bubble) - Ignorance (willful or due to lack of knowledge/intelligence), The Many Will Make Up For The Over-Extraction Of The Few and/or I Myself Will Be Alright.

And you know what?

Those people have very good reasons to believe in the second one (that I illustrated at the start) - you look at Neoliberal Capitalism so far that's what's been happening as Money acummulates in fewer hands and sin ce with regulations neutralized and Corruption through the roof, those holding most of the wealth can do whatever the fuck they want so they are increasingly pillaging wealth from the rest, and the "system" - i.e. everybody else - just gets poorer and instead of Revolutions and Guillotines for the rich all we see is passive acceptance so the rest so have been making up for the depredations of the few for decades. Also just look at how Governments the world over sacrificed everybody else to make sure Finance and Asset owners in general came up better of after the 2008 Crash - these people have very good reason to believe that those in power, being very much in their pockets, will use said power to sacrificed the rest in order to deflect away from the Few the consequences of the actions of those very Few.

And if they's CEOs they also have very good reasons to believe the third - just look at corporate governance in the last decades, with getting those jobs being far more abour Cronyism than Merit and incompetence being de facto rewarded with golden parachutes a even failing upwards. From all they've seen their whole lives there is no reason for them to expect to ever personally suffer the consequences of their own depredations and pillaging.

In summary, some don't even realise the problem and as for those who do, given the experience of CEOs for at least the last 3 or 4 decades, it's pretty rational for them to believe that their depredations wont destroy the Whole enough to come back to them and even if they do, they themselves personally will be alright even if the companies they manage are destroyed.

Like the video game crash of ‘83?

Respectfully: no.

Psychosis is something that builds over time with many factors and AI is one that can definitely be one of the contributing factors. It can be the one that pushes someone over the edge into psychosis and that may seem as "revealing" it but the psychosis could have been avoided without.

This line of thinking feels dangerous to me.

I'm always amazed at people who can't understand that EVERY system is finite.

You've hit the nail on the head with the Infinite Growth statement. Most companies see AI as the next way to cut bottom line costs and hit those annual goals. It's an ouroboros that most companies haven't seen the end of yet. Eventually they'll be left with no talent (arguably the most valuable thing a company can acquire) and uninteresting products nobody is interested in.

How do you train newbies into useful employees when you let AI handle the easy stuff. Where's your pipeline of promotions so you're developing your next generation of developers? Once the shit starts to hit the fan, you'll see them crumble and ask how we got here. Human talent takes YEARS to cultivate and is extremely hard to buy, especially when competition builds from reducing the supply when people stop going into these fields for lack of entry-level jobs.

It's near the bottom but Tarn Adams notes the same thing, that it has been happening far longer than just starting when LLMs became popular.

"It's been going on forever. That was before AI—or this form of AI," Adams says, before lamenting: "They took the letters from me! I have to talk about dwarf behavior now. I can't even talk about dwarf AI. It doesn't exist. It's dwarf behavior, and they misbehave sometimes."

That looks suuuper fun to play!

At least the cryptographers could fall back on the full name!

Anyone working with AI-other-than-llm is now constantly getting weird looks and stupid comments from LLM bros

Well, "AI" in games was always behavior, rather than having anything to do with AI. It was just marketing.

And even then, artificial stupidity is usually more accurate than AI. FPS bots could easily headshot you immediately on sight but like, what good is that. It's literally more work to make them worse at the game.

Absolutely, if I can just chime in here and address the elephant in the room, we really have to focus on the low hanging fruit and leverage our KPIs to really drive home any wins. From a 30,000ft view it looks like we have synergy and alignment here, but if we zoom in we can see that there are nothing but roadblocks and pain points with our holistic approach. I propose we circle back and try to realign our core competencies and remember what really made us a rock star team in the first place.

You don't get to COD 49 with original creative ideas.

Just look at our current president. He is the ultimate byproduct of this mentality.

the real trickle down economics was the psychosis we gained along the way