If AI ends up running companies better than people, won’t shareholders demand the switch? A board isn’t paying a CEO $20 million a year for tradition, they’re paying for results. If an AI can do the job cheaper and get better returns, investors will force it.

And since corporations are already treated as “people” under the law, replacing a human CEO with an AI isn’t just swapping a worker for a machine, it’s one “person” handing control to another.

That means CEOs would eventually have to replace themselves, not because they want to, but because the system leaves them no choice. And AI would be considered a “person” under the law.

  • LadyMeow@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    13 hours ago

    I guess I was being a bit over the top, the CEOs are the capitalists. I guess it’s possible they are doing their job with LLMs now, but just behind the scenes. Like, either they are worth what they are paid, or the system is broken AF and it doesn’t matter.

    I just don’t see them being replaced in any meaningful way.

    • flandish@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      13 hours ago

      CEOs may not be the capitalists at the top of a particular food chain. The shareholding board is, for instance. They can be both but there are plenty of CEO level folks who could, with a properly convinced board, be replaced all nimbly bimbly and such.

      • LadyMeow@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        12 hours ago

        I guess, but they sure shovel plenty of money at say… Musk. So what? Is he worth a trillion? It seems the boards could trim a ton of money if ceos did nothing. Or they do lots and it’s all worth it. Who’s to say.

        I just don’t see LLMs as the vehicle to unseat CEOs, or maybe I’m small minded idk.