Jobs 2025: Improving Yet? Hmmm

September 26, 2025

green-dino_thumbThis essay is the work of a dumb dinobaby. No smart software required.

Computerworld published “Resume.org: Turmoil Ahead for US Job Market As GenAI Disruption Kicks Up Waves.” The information, if it is spot on, is not good news.

image

A 2024 college graduate ponders the future. Ideas and opportunities exist. What’s the path forward?

The write up says:

A new survey from Resume.org paints a stark picture of the current job market, with 50% of US companies scaling back hiring and one in three planning layoffs by the end of the year.

Well, that’s snappy. And there’s more:

The online resume-building platform surveyed 1,000 US business leaders and found that high-salary employees and those lacking AI skills are most at risk. Generational factors play a role, too: 30% of companies say younger employees are more likely to be affected, while 29% cite older employees. Additionally, 19% report that H-1B visa holders are at greater risk of layoffs.

Allegedly accurate data demand a chart. How’s this one?

image

What’s interesting is the younger, dinobabies, and H1B visa holders are safer in their jobs that those who [a] earn a lot of money (excepting the CEO and other carpetland dwellers), employees with no AI savvy, the most recently hired, and entry level employees.

Is there a bright spot in the write up? Yes, and I have put in bold face the  super good news (for some):

Experis parent company ManpowerGroup recently released a survey of more than 40,000 employers putting the US Net Employment Outlook at +28% going into the final quarter of 2025. … GenAI is part of the picture, but it’s not replacing workers as many fear, she said. Instead, one-in-four employers are hiring to keep pace with tech. The bigger issue is an ongoing skills gap — 41% of US IT employers say complex roles are hardest to fill, according to Experis.

Now the super good news applies to job seekers who are able to do the AI thing and handle “complex roles.” In my experience, complex problems tumble into the email of workers at every level. I have witnessed senior managers who have been unable to cope with the complex problems. (If these managers could, why would they hire a blue chip consulting firm and its super upbeat, Type A workers? Answer: Consulting firms are hired for more than problem solving. Sometimes these outfits are retained to push a unit to the sidelines or derail something a higher up wants to stop without being involved in obtaining the totally objective data.)

Several observations:

  1. Bad things seem to be taking place in the job market. I don’t know the cause but the discharge from the smoking guns is tough to ignore
  2. AI AI AI. Whether it works or not is not the question. AI means cost reduction. (Allegedly)
  3. Education and intelligence, connections, and personality may not work their magic as reliably as in the past.

As the illustration in this blog post suggests, alternative employment paths may appear viable. Imagine this dinobaby on OnlyFans.

Stephen E Arnold, September 26, 2025

AI Going Bonkers: No Way, Jos-AI

September 26, 2025

Dino 5 18 25No smart software involved. Just a dinobaby’s work.

Did you know paychopathia machinalis is a thing? I did not. Not much surprises me in the glow of the fast-burning piles of cash in the AI systems. “How’s the air in Memphis near the Grok data center?” I asked a friend in that city. I cannot present his response.

What’s that cash burn deliver? One answer appears in “There Are 32 Different Ways AI Can Go Rogue, Scientists Say — From Hallucinating Answers to a Complete Misalignment with Humanity” provides some insight about the smoke from the burning money piles. The write up says as actual factual:

Scientists have suggested that when artificial intelligence (AI) goes rogue and starts to act in ways counter to its intended purpose, it exhibits behaviors that resemble psychopathologies in humans.

The wizards and magic research gnomes have identified 31 issues. I recognized one: Smart software just makes up baloney. The Fancy Dan term is hallucination. I prefer “make stuff up.”

The write up adds:

What are these dysfunctions? I tracked down the original write up at MDPI.com. The article was downloadable on September 11, 2025. After this date? Who knows?

Here’s what the issues look like when viewed from the wise gnome vantage point:

image

Notice there are six categories of nut ball issues. These are:

  1. Epistemic
  2. Cognitive
  3. Alignment
  4. Ontological
  5. Tool and Interface
  6. Memetic
  7. Revaluation.

I am not sure what the professional definition of these terms is. I can summarize in my dinobaby lingo, however —  Wrong outputs. (I used an em dash, but I did not need AI to select that punctuation mark happily rendered by Microsoft and WordPress as three hyphens. “Regular” computer software gets stuff wrong too. Hello, Excel?

Here’s the best sentence in the Live Science write up about the AI nutsy stuff:

The study also proposes “therapeutic robopsychological alignment,” a process the researchers describe as a kind of “psychological therapy” for AI.

Yep, a robot shrink for smart software. Sounds like a fundable project to me.

Stephen E Arnold, September 26, 2025

Can Human Managers Keep Up with AI-Assisted Coders? Sure, Sure

September 26, 2025

AI may have sped up the process of coding, but it cannot make other parts of a business match its velocity. Business Insider notes, “Andrew Ng Says the Real Bottleneck in AI Startups Isn’t Coding—It’s Product Management.” The former Google Brain engineer and current Stanford professor shared his thoughts on a recent episode of the "No Priors" podcast. Writer Lee Chong Ming tells us:

“In the past, a prototype might take three weeks to develop, so waiting another week for user feedback wasn’t a big deal. But today, when a prototype can be built in a single day, ‘if you have to wait a week for user feedback, that’s really painful,’ Ng said. That mismatch is forcing teams to make faster product decisions — and Ng said his teams are ‘increasingly relying on gut.’ The best product managers bring ‘deep customer empathy,’ he said. It’s not enough to crunch data on user behavior. They need to form a mental model of the ideal customer. It’s the ability to ‘synthesize lots of signals to really put yourself in the other person’s shoes to then very rapidly make product decisions,’ he added.”

Experienced humans matter. Who knew? But Google, for one, is getting rid of managers. This Xoogler suggests managers are important. Is this the reason he is no longer at Google?

Cynthia Murrell, September 26, 2025

Get Cash for Spyware

September 26, 2025

Are you a white hat hacker? Do you have the genius to comprehend code and write your own? Are you a bad actor looking to hang up your black hat and clean up your life? Crowdfense might be the place for you. Here’s the link.

Crowdfense is an organization that “…is the world-leading research hub and acquisition platform for high-quality zero-day exploits and advanced vulnerability research. We acquire the most advanced zero-day research across desktop, mobile, appliances, web and embedded platforms.”

Despite the archaic web design (probably to weed out) uninterested parties, Crowdfense is a respected for spyware. They’re currently advertising for for their Exploit Acquisition Program:

“Since 2017, Crowdfense has operated the world’s most private vulnerability acquisition program, initially backed by a USD 10 million fund and powered by our proprietary Vulnerability Research Hub (VRH) platform. Today, the program has expanded to USD 30 million, with a broader scope that now includes enterprise software, mobile components, and messaging technologies. We offer rewards ranging from USD 10,000 to USD 7 million for full exploit chains or previously unreported capabilities. Partial chains and individual components are assessed individually and priced accordingly. As part of our commitment to the research community, we also offered free high-level technical training to hundreds of vulnerability researchers worldwide.”

If you want to do some good with your bad l33t skills, search for an exploit, invent some spyware, and reap the benefits. You can retire to an island and live off grid. Isn’t that the dream?

Whitney Grace, September 26, 2025

Nine Things Revised for Gens X, Y, and AI

September 25, 2025

green-dino_thumb_thumb[3]This essay is the work of a dumb dinobaby. No smart software required.

A dinobaby named Edward Packard wrote a good essay titled “Nine Things I Learned in 90 Years.” As a dinobaby, I found the points interesting. However, I think there will be “a failure to communicate.” How can this be? Mr. Packard is a lawyer skilled at argument. He is a US military veteran. He is an award winning author. A lifetime of achievement has accrued.

Let’s make the nine things more on target for the GenX, GenY, and GenAI cohorts. Here’s my recasting of Mr. Packard’s ideas tuned to the hyper frequencies on which these younger groups operate.

image

Can the communication gap be bridged? Thanks, MidJourney. Good enough.

The table below presents Mr. Packard’s learnings in one column and the version for the Gen whatevers in the second column. Please, consult Mr. Packard’s original essay. My compression absolutely loses nuances to fit into the confines of a table. The Gen whatevers will probably be okay with how I convert Mr. Packard’s life nuggets into gold suitable for use in a mobile device-human brain connection.

Packard Learnings GenX, Y, AI Version
Be self-constituted Rely on AI chats
Don’t operate on cruise control Doomscroll
Consider others’ feelings Me, me, me
Be happy Coffee and YouTube
Seek eternal views Twitch is my beacon
Do not deceive yourself Think it and it will become reality
Confront mortality Science (or Google) will solve death
Luck plays a role My dad: A connected Yale graduate with a Harvard MBA
Consider what you have Instagram dictates my satisfaction level, thank you!

I appreciate Mr. Packard’s observations. These will resonate at the local old age home and among the older people sitting around the cast iron stove in rural Kentucky where I live.

Bridges in Harlen Country, Kentucky, are tough to build. Iowa? New Jersey? I don’t know.

Stephen E Arnold, September 25, 2025

Telegram Does Content. OpenAI Plants a Grove

September 25, 2025

Dino 5 18 25Written by an unteachable dinobaby. Live with it.

Telegram uses contests to identify smart people who are into Telegram apps. For the last decade, Telegram’s approach has worked reasonably well. The method eliminates much of the bureaucracy and cost of a traditional human resources operation.

OpenAI has a different approach. “OpenAI Announces Grove, a Cohort for ‘Pre-Idea Individuals’ to Build in AI” reports:

OpenAI announced a new program called Grove on September 12, which is aimed at assisting technical talent at the very start of their journey in building startups and companies. The ChatGPT maker says that it isn’t a traditional startup accelerator program, and offers ‘pre-idea’ individuals access to a dense talent network, which includes OpenAI’s researchers, and other resources to build their ideas in the AI space.

OpenAI’s big dog is not emulating the YCombinator approach, nor is he knocking off a copy of the Telegram contests. He is looking for talented people who can create viable applications.

The approach, according to the cited article, is:

The program will begin with five weeks of content hosted in OpenAI’s headquarters in San Francisco, United States. This includes in-person workshops, weekly office hours, and mentorship with OpenAI’s leaders. The first Grove cohort will consist of approximately 15 participants, and OpenAI is recommending individuals from all domains and disciplines across various experience levels.

Will the approach work? Who knows. Telegram’s approach casts a wide net, and it is supported by the evangelism with cash approach of Telegram’s proxy, the TON Foundation. OpenAI is starting small. Telegram reviews “solutions” to coding problems. OpenAI’s Grove is more like a window box with some petunias and maybe a periwinkle or two.

The Telegram and OpenAI approaches illustrate how some high profile organizations are trying to arrive at personnel and partner solutions in a way different from that taken by Salesforce or similar quasi-new era outfits.

What other ideas will Mr. Altman implement? Is Telegram a source of inspiration to him?

Stephen E Arnold, September 25, 2025

Modern Management Method and Modern Pricing Plan

September 25, 2025

Dino 5 18 25Sadly I am a dinobaby and too old and stupid to use smart software to create really wonderful short blog posts.

Despite the sudden drop in quantity and quality in my newsfeed outputs, one of my team spotted a blog post titled “Slack Is Extorting Us with a $195K/Year Bill Increase.” Slack is, I believe, a unit of Salesforce. That firm is in the digital Rolodex business. Over the years, Salesforce has dabbled with software to help sales professionals focus. The effort was part of Salesforce’s attention retention push. Now Salesforce is into collaborative tools for professionals engaged in other organizational functions. The pointy end of the “force” is smart software. The leadership of Salesforce has spoken about the importance of AI and suggested that other firms’ collaboration software is not keeping up with Slack.

image

A forward-leaning team of deciders reaches agreement about pricing. The alpha dog is thrilled with the idea of a price hike. The beta buddies are less enthusiastic. But it is accounting job to collect on booked but unpaid revenue. The AI system called Venice produced this illustration. 

The write up says:

For nearly 11 years, Hack Club – a nonprofit that provides coding education and community to teenagers worldwide – has used Slack as the tool for communication. We weren’t freeloaders. A few years ago, when Slack transitioned us from their free nonprofit plan to a $5,000/year arrangement, we happily paid. It was reasonable, and we valued the service they provided to our community.

The “attention” grabber in this blog post is this paragraph:

However, two days ago, Slack reached out to us and said that if we don’t agree to pay an extra $50k this week and $200k a year, they’ll deactivate our Slack workspace and delete all of our message history.

I think there is a hint of a threat to the Salesforce customer. I am probably incorrect. Salesforce is popular, and it is owned by a high profile outfit embracing attention and AI. Assume that the cited passage reflects how the customer understood the invoice and its 3,000 percent plus increase and the possible threat. My question is, “What type of management process is at work at Salesforce / Slack?”

Here are my thoughts. Please, remember that I am a dinobaby and generally clueless about modern management methods used to establish pricing.

  1. Salesforce has put pressure on Slack to improve its revenue quickly. The Slack professionals knee jerked and boosted bills to outfits likely to pay up and keep quiet. Thus, the Hack Club received a big bill. Do this enough times and you can demonstrate more revenue, even though it may be unpaid. Let the bean counters work to get the money. I wonder if this is passive resistance from Slack toward Salesforce’s leadership? Oh, of course not.
  2. Salesforce’s pushes for attention and AI are not pumping the big bucks Salesforce needs to avoid the negative consequences of missing financial projections. Bad things happen when this occurs.
  3. Salesforce / Slack are operating in a fog of unknowing. The hope for big payoffs from attention and AI are slow to materialize. The spreadsheet fever that justifies massive investments in AI is yielding to some basic financial realities: Customers are buying. Sticking AI into communications is not a home run for Slack users, and it may not be for the lucky bean counters who have to collect on the invoices for booked but unpaid revenue.

The write up states:

Anyway, we’re moving to Mattermost. This experience has taught us that owning your data is incredibly important, and if you’re a small business especially, then I’d advise you move away too.

Salesforce / Slack loses a customer and the costs associated with handling data for what appears to be a lower priority and lower value customer.

Modern management methods are logical and effective. Never has a dinobaby learned so much about today’s corporate tactics than I have from my reading about outfits like Salesforce / and Slack.

Stephen E Arnold, September 25, 2025

Same Old Search Problem, Same Old Search Solution

September 25, 2025

A problem as old as time is finding information within an organization. A good company organizes their information in paper and digital files, but most don’t do this. Digital information is arguably harder to find because you never know what hard drive or utility disc to search through. Apparently BlueDocs, via WRAL News, found a solution to this issue: “BlueDocs Unveils Revolutionary AI Global Search Feature, Transforming How Organizations Access Internal Documentation Software.”

The press release about BlueDocs, an AI global documentation software platform, opens with the usual industry and revolutionary jargon. Blah. Blah. Blah.

They have a special sauce:

“Unlike traditional search solutions that operate within platform boundaries, AI Global Search leverages advanced artificial intelligence to understand context, intent, and relationships across disparate knowledge sources. Users can now execute a single search query to simultaneously explore BlueDocs content, Google Workspace files, Microsoft 365 documents, and integrated third-party platforms.”

It delivers special results:

“ ‘AI Global Search has fundamentally changed how our team accesses information,’ said one Beta Customer. ‘What used to require checking five different platforms now happens with a single search. It’s particularly transformative for onboarding new team members who previously needed training on multiple systems just to find basic information.’”

Does this lingo sound like every other enterprise search solution’s marketing collateral? If BlueDocs delivers an easily programmable, out-of-the-box solution that interfaces across all platforms and returns usable results: EXCELLENT. If it needs extra tech support at a very special low price and custom engineering, the similarity with enterprise search of yore is back again.

Whitney Grace, September 25, 2025

Want to Catch the Attention of Bad Actors? Say, Easier Cross Chain Transactions

September 24, 2025

green-dino_thumbThis essay is the work of a dumb dinobaby. No smart software required.

I know from experience that most people don’t know about moving crypto in a way that makes deanonymization difficult. Commercial firms offer deanonymization services. Most of the well-known outfits’ technology delivers. Even some home-grown approaches are useful.

For a number of years, Telegram has been the go-to service for some Fancy Dancing related to obfuscating crypto transactions. However, Telegram has been slow on the trigger when it comes to smart software and to some of the new ideas percolating in the bubbling world of digital currency.

A good example of what’s ahead for traders, investors, and bad actors is described in “Simplifying Cross-Chain Transactions Using Intents.” Like most crypto thought, confusing lingo is a requirement. In this article, the word “intent” refers to having crypto currency in one form like USDC and getting 100 SOL or some other crypto. The idea is that one can have fiat currency in British pounds, walk up to a money exchange in Berlin, and convert the pounds to euros. One pays a service charge. Now in crypto land, the crypto has to move across a blockchain. Then to get the digital exchange to do the conversion, one pays a gas fee; that is, a transaction charge. Moving USDC across multiple chains is a hassle and the fees pile up.

The article “Simplifying Cross Chain Transaction Using Intents” explains a brave new world. No more clunky Telegram smart contracts and bots. Now the transaction just happens. How difficult will the deanonymization process become? Speed makes life difficult. Moving across chains makes life difficult. It appears that “intents” will be a capability of considerable interest to entities interested in making crypto transactions difficult to deanonymize.

The write up says:

In technical terms, intents are signed messages that express a user’s desired outcome without specifying execution details. Instead of crafting complex transaction sequences yourself, you broadcast your intent to a network of solvers (sophisticated actors) who then compete to fulfill your request.

The write up explains the benefit for the average crypto trader:

when you broadcast an intent, multiple solvers analyze it and submit competing quotes. They might route through different DEXs, use off-chain liquidity, or even batch your intent with others for better pricing. The best solution wins.

Now, think of solvers as your personal trading assistants who understand every connected protocol, every liquidity source, and every optimization trick in DeFi. They make money by providing better execution than you could achieve yourself and saves you a a lot of time.

Does this sound like a use case for smart software? It is, but the approach is less complicated than what one must implement using other approaches. Here’s a schematic of what happens in the intent pipeline:

image

The secret sauce for the approach is what is called a “1Click API.” The API handles the plumbing for the crypto bridging or crypto conversion from currency A to currency B.

If you are interested in how this system works, the cited article provides a list of nine links. Each provides additional detail. To be up front, some of the write ups are more useful than others. But three things are clear:

  1. Deobfuscation is likely to become more time consuming and costly
  2. The system described could be implemented within the Telegram blockchain system as well as other crypto conversion operations.
  3. The described approach can be further abstracted into an app with more overt smart software enablements.

My thought is that money launderers are likely to be among the first to explore this approach.

Stephen E Arnold, September 24, 2025

Fixing AI Convenience Behavior: Lead, Collaborate, and Mindset?

September 24, 2025

green-dino_thumb_thumbThis essay is the work of a dumb dinobaby. No smart software required.

I read “AI-Generated “Workslop” Is Destroying Productivity.” Six people wrote the article for the Harvard Business Review. (Whatever happened to independent work?)

The write up reports:

Employees are using AI tools to create low-effort, passable looking work that ends up creating more work for their coworkers.

Let’s consider this statement in the context of college students’ behavior when walking across campus. I was a freshman in college in 1962. The third rate institution had a big green area with no cross paths. The enlightened administration put up “keep off the grass” signs.

What did the students do? They walked the shortest distance between two points. Why? Why go the long way? Why spend extra time? Why be stupid? Why be inconvenienced?

image

The cited write up from the estimable Harvard outfit says:

But while some employees are using this ability [AI tools] to polish good work, others use it to create content that is actually unhelpful, incomplete, or missing crucial context about the project at hand. The insidious effect of workslop is that it shifts the burden of the work downstream, requiring the receiver to interpret, correct, or redo the work. In other words, it transfers the effort from creator to receiver.

Yep, convenience. Why waste effort?

The fix is to eliminate smart software. But that won’t happen. Why? Smart software provides a way to cut humanoids from the costs of running a business. Efficiency works. Well, mostly.

The write up says:

we jettison hard mental work to technologies like Google because it’s easier to, for example, search for something online than to remember it. Unlike this mental outsourcing to a machine, however, workslop uniquely uses machines to offload cognitive work to another human being. When coworkers receive workslop, they are often required to take on the burden of decoding the content, inferring missed or false context.

And what about changing this situation? Did the authors trot out the old chestnuts from Kurt Lewin and the unfreeze, change, refreeze model? Did the authors suggest stopping AI deployment? Nope. The fix involves:

  1. Leadership
  2. Mindsets
  3. Collaboration

Just between you and me, I think this team of authors is angling for some juicy consulting assignments. These will involve determining who, how much, what, and impact of using slop AI. Then there will be a report with options. The team will implement “options” and observe the results. If the process works, the client will sign a long=term contract with the team.

Keep off the grass!

Stephen E Arnold, September 24, 2025

« Previous PageNext Page »

  • Archives

  • Recent Posts

  • Meta