Why Bullshit Jobs Are (Finally) Dying
Why Bullshit Jobs Are (Finally) Dying [video]
A video argues that Graeber-style bullshit jobs multiplied on easy money and low interest rates, and that tighter money and AI are now thinning them out. Commenters push back: one calls the framing dishonest for implying every laid-off tech worker was dead weight, another says the jobs aren't vanishing so much as shifting, from "culture coordinator" to "AI ethics reviewer."
BS jobs may actually not be going away, just shifting, e.g. from "culture coordinator" to "AI ethics reviewer."
- benzible
Watched about a minute of it - starts with an anecdote about a guy with a no-show job, then moves to big tech layoffs and "these companies ran exactly the same" afterwards, implying that everyone who was laid off was 100% dead weight. Turned it off immediately.
- themightyquinn
At first I thought we’d talk about the mechanisms that go into not noticing employees literally not showing up to jobs for years and maybe a larger trend of what allows for that. Tech layoffs are less interesting and feels a bit premature to dub those jobs as useless and not acknowledge these businesses transitioning to very capx heavy businesses.
- GlibMonkeyDeath
I've always had a problem with Graeber's definition of exactly what a "bullshit" job is. Every time one is identified, the "well, akshually..." comes out, and often for defendable reasons.
Take "social media coordinator" - we had some young person at our Fortune 500 company have this position, which led to some eye rolls. But is it really "bullshit" if she keeps an exec from posting something embarrassing, which could damage the stock price? I guarantee you that companies have reasonable justifications for every position.
AI is more a tool that allows a productivity boost per employee, like all other automation tools (e.g. SolidWorks almost completely automated mechanical drawings, so drafting is not a thing any more - something I was told in high school, BTW, that would always be in demand...)