I wonder what dumbfuck CEO thought saying the computer did it was a way to get around retaliation laws.
Technology
A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.
Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.
Subcommunities on Beehaw:
This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.
Even worse, it suggests that whatever the AI used as training data also shows retaliation. Since it's internal, there's a good chance they just showed that they illegally retaliate.
It's only dumb if they get fined for more than they gained by doing it.
Which isn't a thing in the US.
Probably. Most mass firings generally have to show that there was a process and that said process didn't unfairly target certain unprotected classes. So, Meta made AI the process.
Given that we have no AI laws, honestly probably not a stupid decision, just very unethical one.
Retaliation doesn’t become legal if you get a robot intermediary to do it.
Late Stage 'Surveillance' Capitalism.
The Skynet will kill us all.
...duh...