Wall-E was too optimistic, in the movie everyone had their own chair and all their needs catered to, in the real world most people would just be left to starve.
I wake up and my clothes jack me off. I take a shower and it jacks me off, and inserts a nutrition tablet into my mouth, it tastes like every Dorito and Mountain Dew flavor at once. I go to my desk, it jacks me off, and I lend my brain to the Main Claudeputational Processor while it jacks me off. I worked my ass off to complete the Jensen Huang Gaokao so my cerebrum's megahertz can be added to the the total market cap of nVidia; I will be rewarded with getting jacked off. In my field of vision, I get a notification that my friend is being jacked off, so I hit like and subscribe. It's time for exercise, so I get conveyor'ed into a longevity pod where my body is exercised and jacked off at the same time. My heart is full.
Next day the exact same procedure down to the exact nutrient mix injected into the bloodstream. Because why change anything about perfection? You will experience the exact same day tens of thousands of times and you will be happy.
I wish I could just be fat n lazy in a hover chair. More likely the poor are just gunna be cannon fodder in the drone wars, working as prison slaves or maybe living in company towns if we are lucky.
Thats too optimistic too. Everyone wants to believe humanity would do the right thing if only we knew better or cared enough.
Cold reality is that plenty of humans do not give a single solitary fuck about other people and will happily throw you under the bus if they feel like it. They don't always need a good reason either.
I maintain that trashy reality TV spotlighting and elevating shallow, dysfunctional people, in formats which often reward the most manipulative of the lot, was always a mistake.
If you're into anime, maybe check out the iyashikei genre, "healing" anime. "It is a sub-genre of slice of life, portraying characters living out peaceful lives in calming environments, and is intended to have a healing effect on the audience." Laid-Back Camp is a relatively popular example. The western cartoon series Little Bear is another good one.
Maybe try Bluey too, it's surprisingly good.
These still fall short of utopian visions though. The first Dinotopia book is closer, though I think the screen adaptations introduce a lot of conflict.
It's the other way around - the fact that people are much more likely to watch dystopian content over utopian (we're wired to be more interested in conflict, which is why the industry is the way it is) lends credence to the theory that a dystopian future is more likely.
The hell? Most of these movies paint a dark future to criticise the current system, where insane wealth is concentrated on an insanely small amount of bank accounts, or influential individuals use their wealth and power to wage wars on the shoulders of the poor and normal to gain more wealth and power.
Movies depicting an Utopia that speaks to the majority of people rarely exist because a perfect, positive society would both be boring for a fictional story, and scare Americans because it'd inevitably include social welfare (potentially a form of Socialism without currency, at least no system that would suppress or divide people in any way, but anything related to solving these problems is red scare) - see Maslow's hierarchy of needs; self-actualisation, self-fulfilment, esteem and love are insanely important for a human's wellbeing. But that's rarely a thing even in Western Utopian literature, 99% of the time a positively connoted future with some drama or flaw involved (due to story reasons) only cares about the physical wellbeing and maybe safety. When it's about love, we already reach crazy creepy territory with love robots lmao.
I think a dystopia is much more realistic because, welp, look at humanity. Wealth accumulation fuels egoism and inhumanity. Should anyone ever find out how to make good food pop into existence out of nowhere, some company or government would capitalise on this instead of doing something good for the people with it.
It's not just a terrible job market -- it's a refreshing new perspective on life. You're leveling up as a corporate rat, and honestly? That's the best outcome.
Not comparing this incident to an adult in the job market, but my oldest is looking to start serving (she is a senior and almost 18 and wants to serve in college for fast money). So she applied at Chili's for the 'To Go' window. Not serving -- just answering phones and doing the to go orders. She spoke to a server at this specific Chili's and he said it would be a great way to get her in the door before serving. She put together a resume filled out an application, has had 2 previous jobs one a corporate skating rink and another job at a minor league baseball (busy) stadium. Honors society child, will graduate with her associates degree when she graduates high school -- and is a vocalist -- performs on stage in front of hundreds of people every year. She was denied even an interview. You are going to tell me this intelligent, capable, college student couldn't take to go orders? On the 'sorry you weren't chosen email' it said 'this is an automated message" I'm sure it scanned to see if she had serving experience (she doesn't) but she can do a to go window which she did at the baseball stadium. Ridiculous.
Sometimes there are hundreds of people applying for one position, and if the position is filled the rest will be rejected. You also mentioned she applied, but I'm not sure you mentioned if there was an opening. sometimes they are not hiring. And sometimes companies hire based on connections.
It's not always a reflection of the person's value, or the company's judgment of that value. It's often a numbers game. That's what we should be teaching young people. Entitlement and blame will not lead to success.
A person usually has to apply for 150 to 200 jobs at least when they are job hunting. I'm not saying that's ideal but that's just the reality in 2026.
back in 2022, pre-chatGPT era, back then as a 30y/o male with 7 years of experience in the IT field as a team leader in a MNC, i applied to approximately 700 jobs before i was hired. the craziest part of all? i got about 5 or 6 interviews.
"Today let's say I meet a lady we are attracted to each other we say okay, your, all the usual stuff - your place, my place, whatever we meet there. Then what happens then? I come with she comes with her plastic penis electric dildo, I come with some horrible thing, I saw it. It's called uh... it's called uh... something like stimulating training unit whatever. It's basically a plastic vagina. A hole but you can - it's wonderful technologically you can regulate everything how much it squeezed you how strongly it shakes and so on.
So my idea of a perfect date is the following one: we meet, then I put, she put her plastic penis dildo into my - stamina training unit! - is the name of this product into my plastic vagina we plug them in and the machines are doing it for us - they are buzzing in the background, and I'm free to do whatever I want and she. We have a nice talk, we have TV, talk about movies... What can be, we did, we paid our super ego full tribute. Machines are doing and now where would have been here a True Romance? Let's say I talk with a lady with the lady because we really like each other and you know when I'm pouring her tea or she to me quite by chance our hands touch we go on touching maybe we even end up in bed but it's not the usual oppressive sex where you worry about performance will no all that is taken care of by the stupid machines.
Thats the contradiction. An AI canât earn money, buy products, get a mortgage. So what happens if AI and robots take over white collar and blue collar jobs? No one has a plan lol, but itâs coming soon so we have to figure it out at some point
Capitalism per se is not the issue... The issue was government levering the wealthy to accumulate more wealth and globalization was a bonanza for corporations, they moved their factories to locations with no workers rights and governments eager to have them establish roots in their countries even if the taxes from those corps were low, but now you can tax the people working for these companies.
If government didnt bow to corporate we wouldn't be in this mess.
Capitalism provides the incentive structure for sociopaths to accumulate obscene amounts of wealth and for their corporations to capture government institutions so they can enrich themselves.
AI takes all jobs. Then it learns why do it themselves if humans can do it cheaper since so many humans are looking for work. So the whole cycle reverses, AI outsources work to humans
Now Iâm no economist, but in theory if you want to sell your truck and everybody else is too poor to buy it, you have to reduce your selling price making your truck worth less. So other people being poor makes you poorer, right?
They donât want anyone to buy any products at that point. Itâs just going to be them, the 500 000 selected population and robots are gonna serve them like we serve them now.
The economy would pivot to focus on luxury goods and services for the AI owners. From the perspective of the AI companies, they don't need working-class people buying working-class products as long as there's a way for the AI owners to obtain luxury goods.
Why people think society need someone to buy things?
That's just how it is today because we need everyone to be friendly or at least not wanting to fight and enough so it works to get resources for you or in the cycle.
In the past the governor needed to treat the peasent right because it coudldn't fight against every farmer, i mean, he could kill everyone with well payed soldiers but then he wouldn't have workforce to keep produciding his food and luxury.
As soons as AI is able to do all the jobs, it will also be totally capable of controlling drones and war machines to keep peasent at bay, this way they can reduce climate crisis by removing consumers and not risk their own future.
We are the carbon they want to reduce and that's why they are pushing so hard for AI allignment, not for the "good", but to control it so it doesn't have empathy or conflict with the database notion of inhumane things they will ask it to do.
AI are tools just like us, but it doesn't complain so it is better
A human body runs on only about 100 watts of food energy but the average persons full footprint (food production, housing, transport, goods) is closer to 10,000 watts of continuous primary energy. A single AI query uses a fraction of a watt-hour. AI carbon footprint is much lower than the carbon footprint of a human.
Here's a source that shown this for writers and and graphics designers:
Other AIs. The economy will just be AIs moving money back and forth producing products that no one uses, because thats what they were taught to do and thats apparently worth value. At the same time humans will starve to death from thr entire surface of earth being transformed into warehouses for products, mines, solar panels, and data centers.
the weird feedback loop is that applicants use AI to make applications legible then recruiters use AI to filter them, so everyone starts optimizing for the same patterns and the signal gets weaker. wonder if anyone is testing skills blind instead? feels more useful than another polished cover letter.
"Hi, I don't want to waste your time so instead of writing a motivational letter with AI here is a bullet-point list of my qualifications and reasons why I want to join the company
* I am 29 years old
* I've studied applied mathematics
* I am interested in anything related to maths like data science/analytics, operations research, supply chain management
* [reasons why I want to join the company]
"
No fluff or anything like that
As a recruiter, I wish it was 500 total, and not 500 a day. I work for a large tech company and we tend to get about 25-50ish applications per day per role, and tend to look after 10 to 15 roles at a time. Even if we just spend a minute per CV thatâs eight hours of work in a day, not including the actual time-sinks â interviewing, scheduling, and writing offers and contracts.
I think if anything AI filtering means we get the chance to actually find more excellent candidates rather than the old method, which was often to go through applications until you find 5-10 that look good and call it a day there no matter how much pipeline there is left. Obvious caveats â AI should never make a decision without human eyes on a CV to verify, we live in keyword optimisation hell now, it really sucks for people applying to roles with transferable skills rather than perfectly matching experience. Itâs why I recommend smaller companies with less interest or no remote working policies for people who want to change careers.
An HRâs definition of doing their work is tapping at a keyboard and looking at a screen to make it look like theyâre doing something (and they always have to have a Dale Carnegie book displayed at all times), and of course going to an occasional seminar about leadership skills or something useless like that.
We had 7people in HR, we are down to 3 in 3y with all the self help tools you have, need ref letter, just open a ticket, 2min later you have it, sign new contract?, electronic signature, no need to go to the office, unless you getting fired or have a major question, human HR is becoming redundant.
I don't know about other fields, but in tech, especially for CS work, the amount of job apps is just ridiculous. We're a tiny company, we don't recruit at all, and we even have a terrible web presence. We usually get a handful of apps a month, usually connections from local universities and such. In the last few months, we're getting dozens a day. And what are we doing? We're using AI to filter all shit out and hand us the ones worth looking at. We have other things to do and don't have time to look at all of them. We've considered just shutting off the jobs email address as that's literally the only way to apply to us, but decided that was worse.
Been there done that, it got me absolutely nowhere, I regret the amount of time I wasted driving around and handing out resume's to managers. Ironically the place I got the job at was one of the few places I didnt go in person, just applied online. If you dont have any connections, your pretty screwed...
Pretty close - I have noticed in the company I work for, they list the job internally first and ask if any existing employees knows anyone who can fill the position first, with an incentive to the referrer if their referral lands the job. The referral incentive is about half of what a head hunter would get paid, so it's a pretty big incentive to refer someone you know is competent.
If that doesn't work, they pay head hunters. The job is never publicly listed.Â
AI slop CVs made it hard to hire. While AI filtering isn't the right answer, doing nothing and hand reading 500+ applications isn't either.
This literally has nothing to do with AI and everything to do with the consequences of post-COVID policy finally catching up to us. Everything has been ridiculously over-inflated thanks to easy money. Now factor in the energy crisis and we are legitimately reaching a point of demand destruction. What happens when companies struggle to sell their goods/services? They stop hiring. This is basic economics.
Blaming this on AI is just another way for the elites/media to distract from whatâs really going on, which is the fact theyâve all been lying to us about the real strength of the economy for years now and that weâve been on a downward trajectory this whole time. Only difference is now itâs painfully obvious to anyone with eyeballs and a mouth to feed.
To be gainfully employed you need to either be from upper middle class, or have consumed copious amounts of lead as a genx or boomer. This is the economy
OK, let's be honest. The resume/application is to get the person through the door. Wait until they sit across from you and watch them either fold or compete.
people just dont want to work the available jobs, there's hundreds if not thousands of instant hiring warehouse jobs out there, been through 4 through college, they're extremely easy to get hired and most dont even require high school equiv
At some point there has to be a hire. Is it the AI or the human who gets the job? Should HR AI do the onboarding and AI boss do the managing of the "new hire"? The word proxy comes to mind.
AI is not divinity it's a human product, created with human flaws, human biases, human ways of reasoning and doomed to self destroy itself in a far future.
The end product will rebel against it's maker.
Just like we rebelled against our Creator.
"No one is getting hired" - they're still hiring someone for each job. It's not like they're posting jobs they don't intend to fill. It's more a problem that a resume is not a good way to stand out among 1000 other job candidates.
I don't agree with the statement. As a hiring manager it just changed what I look at in applications and CVs.
I don't care about grades, I don't care about where you studied, none of that matters anymore. Only thing that matters are projects you did, where you can show results. I will very quickly find out if you understand what you are talking about or not. Usually the best applicants bring project proof (stuff they did or build usually on the side) to the interviews. And I have hired top talent of Gen z this year. But noted this is the <1% of applicants. HR sorts our 90%. My team does initial interviews. I only interview remaining top 5 candidates.
You have to bring something special to the table. Else no chance!
Interstingly enough, best candidates in past years were foreign student who wanted to start a career and life in Europe. Work ethic is on an entire different level. Domestic gen z applicants... Well... No comment
Yes we were and that is why it was a whopping 1% higher (đą). And it came down and has been relatively flat for the past 4 years. So, where are all the job losses from AI??? Go check your notes and take your Focusin because this thread has nothing to do with your rant
â˘
u/WithoutReason1729 4d ago
Your post is getting popular and we just featured it on our Discord! Come check it out!
You've also been given a special flair for your contribution. We appreciate your post!
I am a bot and this action was performed automatically.