CEOs clone themselves with AI while workers fear losing jobs
While tech professionals are fearing losing their jobs to AI, CEOs and other corporate executives are using the tech to "scale" themselves.
Company executives are using AI tools, such as Delphi and Tavus, to upload their written content, keynote speeches, interviews, and even meeting recordings to create text and voice chatbots and video avatars trained on their work.
Otter CEO Sam Liang says that his schedule is packed with meetings, and by the end of the day, he barely has the energy to speak. "I'm double-booked. Triple-booked," he told
Axios
.
"I prefer to call it Sam's Avatar," Liang said. "Avatar feels more human."
Otter is currently testing a prototype of the tool, called "Meeting Avatar." Eventually, it's expected to join meetings, respond to questions, participate in discussions, and share recordings along with notes and summaries.
Last month, Klarna CEO Sebastian Siemiatkowski and Zoom's Eric Yuan were among the first to try out
AI versions of themselves for public presentations
.
Discover the stories of your interest
Blockchain
5 Stories
Cyber-safety
7 Stories
Fintech
9 Stories
E-comm
9 Stories
ML
8 Stories
Edtech
6 Stories
At Klarna, an AI-powered avatar of Siemiatkowski led most of the company's recent earnings calls. The avatar eventually revealed that it was powered by AI.
After Klarna's experiment, Zoom CEO Eric Yuan introduced his own AI avatar. It delivered the opening remarks during the company's earnings call.
'I am proud to be among the first CEOs to use an avatar in an earnings call,' said the digital Yuan. 'It is just one example of how Zoom is pushing the boundaries of communication and collaboration. At the same time, we know trust and security are essential… We've built strong safeguards to prevent misuse, protect identity, and ensure avatars are used responsibly.'
A
Harvard Business Review study
published last September tested GPT-4o in a simulated CEO role. The results showed that the AI outperformed most human participants on several tasks, but lost its job earlier than its human counterpart.
The study concluded that 'Despite its impressive performance, AI cannot assume the full responsibility of a CEO in markets that serve humans. Instead, it can significantly improve the strategic planning process and help prevent costly mistakes.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
India Today
8 hours ago
- India Today
Tech firm interviews 450 out of 12,000 applicants, hires none. Here's why
A tech company's hiring drive for a junior developer role took an unexpected turn as not a single candidate made the cut, despite 12,000 applications and 450 interviews.A Reddit post, now doing the rounds online, revealed how the company's recruitment process hit a wall when most candidates turned out to be over-reliant on AI-generated code. 'We recently posted a job opening on LinkedIn for Junior Frontend/Backend Devs and QA roles, offering a salary range up to Rs 20 lakh,' the post read. advertisement 'Over 12,000 people applied. We filtered out more than 10,000 candidates due to insufficient skill sets or resumes that didn't align with the role, not because we want to be harsh, but because we don't want to waste candidates' time as well as ours by putting them through interview rounds only to reject them later,' it added. The role was open to junior developers, and even though the company permitted the use of tools like ChatGPT during the process, they were met with answers that lacked understanding.'We even allowed candidates to use GPT to solve problems,' the post read, adding, 'However, when we ask about time or space complexity, or an explanation of the code they just wrote, many are unable to respond.'The hiring team pointed out that most applicants were 'vibe coding,' copy-pasting AI responses without grasping the underlying logic. advertisementAccording to the post, this has made it nearly impossible to identify candidates who genuinely understand what they're company also admitted that the entire process has left it questioning how to refine its recruitment methods going a look at the post here: The post received mixed reactions online. While several users supported the company's frustration, others called out the flawed interview strategy.'Either your recruiting team is bringing you bad devs or your process has some issue,' a user pointed out, while another wrote, 'Allowing AI in DSA round is more of a red flag. This seems more like a boast about how no one's good enough.'One user suggested a solution the company might already be adopting: 'Apparently, we are switching to quiz-based interviews on DoSelect. Once cleared, then the Google Meet round.'The post has sparked a wider debate about AI-dependency in job applications and the evolving challenges in hiring genuine talent in the tech world.
NDTV
8 hours ago
- NDTV
Tech Company Fails To Hire After 450 Interviews, Says Candidates Are Copy-Pasting From AI
A tech company recently took to Reddit to express disappointment after failing to hire a single candidate for a junior developer role. In its post, the anonymous firm revealed that around 12,000 people had applied, and 450 were interviewed. However, it ultimately didn't hire anyone, citing concerns that a large number of applicants relied heavily on artificial intelligence (AI) tools for coding without truly understanding the underlying logic. "We recently posted a job opening on LinkedIn for Junior Frontend/Backend Devs and QA roles, offering a salary range up to Rs 20L. Over 12,000 people applied. We filtered out more than 10,000 candidates due to insufficient skill sets or resumes that didn't align with the role, not because we want to be harsh, but because we don't want to waste candidates time as well ours by putting them through interview rounds only to reject them later," the company wrote. "We even allowed candidates to use GPT to solve problems. However, when we ask about time or space complexity, or an explanation of the code they just wrote, many are unable to respond," it added. Took more than 450 interviews for a single vacancy. No one got selected. by u/ZestycloseWater5742 in developersIndia Further, the firm claimed that a lot of candidates are "copy-pasting" code from AI without understanding a single line of it. "This makes it extremely difficult these days to find a developer who truly understands what they've written," it said. "We're starting to question whether we're making mistakes in our hiring process, or if it's just high time for junior devs to realize the importance of actually understanding the code before pasting it from GPT," the company concluded. The post has triggered a discussion online, with several users suggesting that it evaluate its interview process. "You seriously need to evaluate your interview process and the time wasted on interviews. Either your recruiting team is bringing you bad developers or your process is having issues. Either way, wasting 450 hours to find one engineer is stupid, to say the least," wrote one user. "Evaluate your interview process. Highly inefficient. Don't blame the candidates. There are serious expectations mismatch," commented another. Responding to this, the company stated, "The entire point is people are going to use AI anyways in their Jobs as well everyone does, so there is no point of saying to them that do not use AI to write code in the interviews as well. The candidate should understand the solution and the logic behind each and every line, that is our only concern." Some users also agreed with the original poster. "Truly agree, candidates nowadays are missing on core funcdamentals. Your HR team can try to implement a resume shortlister and a tech assignment round before F2F," wrote one user. "Looking at comments, I somehow feel, people are not ready to accept that candidates are not good and just relying on AI without understanding basic things. Everybody is blaming either hiring process or budget issues," commented another.
Hindustan Times
17 hours ago
- Hindustan Times
₹20 lakh role, no one qualified: Indian tech company shocked after 450 interviews lead nowhere
A tech company claimed its recent interview drive for a single vacancy produced disappointing results. As per the post, 12,000 people applied for the position, among which 450 were interviewed. However, the company says it didn't end up hiring a single candidate as an alarming number of applicants for the junior developer role relied heavily on AI tools for coding without grasping the logic behind their work. 'We even allowed candidates to use GPT to solve problems. However, when we ask about time or space complexity, or an explanation of the code they just wrote, many are unable to respond,' read a part of the Reddit post. 'A lot of candidates are vibe coding essentially copy-pasting code from AI without understanding a single line of it. This makes it extremely difficult these days to find a developer who truly understands what they've written,' it continued. The company further added that the entire experience has left it questioning its hiring process. An individual remarked, 'You seriously need to evaluate your interview process and the time wasted on interviews. Either your recruiting team is bringing you bad developers or your process is having issues. Either way, wasting 450 hours to find one engineer is stupid, to say the least.' Another added, 'Evaluate your interview process. It's highly inefficient. Don't blame the candidates. There is a serious expectation mismatch.' Addressing the criticism, the OP posted, 'The entire point is people are going to use AI anyways in their Jobs as well everyone does, so there is no point of saying to them that do not use AI to write code in the interviews as well. The candidate should understand the solution and the logic behind each and every line, that is our only concern.' Further clarifying that the position was for a sixth member of a 5-person team in an Indian tech company. A fourth wrote, 'If out of 12k people you are interviewing 450, I am guessing you are already shortlisting AI proficient people. That means their resumes are already optimized using AI. So there goes all possible eligible candidates in 11.55k people. That's why recruitment is the toughest in the AI age.'
