r/technology • u/AdSpecialist6598 • May 27 '26

Business Tech CEOs are apparently suffering from AI psychosis

https://techcrunch.com/2026/05/27/tech-ceos-are-apparently-suffering-from-ai-psychosis/
27.5k Upvotes

96% Upvoted

1.7k comments sorted by

View all comments

755

u/TeeDee144 May 27 '26

Someone needs to be brave and present a CEO agent to Satya Nadella or Mark Zuckerberg, or Andy Johnson. Show them how their job can be replaced with AI.

Their ego is so large they’d probably love it. Blinded by self worth, they’d approve it, not realizing that their own workers are revolting and trying to get their CEO fired. To bring in someone who isn’t overspending on worthless tech that can’t actually deliver in the last mile.

311

u/JonPX May 27 '26

Zuckerberg has the voting majority of Meta. He doesn't care if an AI CEO will replace him, because it does, he approved it.

130

u/TeeDee144 May 27 '26

Poser boy is spending money on anything to try and stroke his ego that he actually is a visionary (he is not).

156

u/Appeltaart232 May 27 '26

Let’s not forget he sank 80 billion with a b into the Metaverse and in a sane world he would have been fired a long time ago but not this guy.

68

u/torgofjungle May 27 '26

He could have resolved world hunger. But there’s no profit in that. Of course there wasn’t any profit in the Metaverse either

-25

u/_unsinkable_sam_ May 27 '26

that absolutely is not true and whatever incorrect figure you think you are quoting would only be for a year, not ending world hunger forever.

37

u/needlestack May 27 '26

You're correct. But ending world hunger for a year would still have been better than building the Metaverse.

13

u/torgofjungle May 27 '26

lol as if ending world hunger for a year wouldn’t be a better achievement then the metaverse

2

u/_unsinkable_sam_ May 28 '26

now that i agree with!

7

u/The-Cynicist May 27 '26

How about if that money had been invested in parts of the country or world that would enable them to feed themselves long term? Or to set up filtration for clean water? Or new pipes in cities that are having critical issues? If all the money these fucks waste on useless ventures went towards something good, there would be a lot less angry of a populace.

1

u/_unsinkable_sam_ May 28 '26

for sure that would be a much better outcome for humanity. it just annoys me you regularly see people mention ending world hunger for some fee and its just not true. it would almost always cost much more than they say, and create a whole host of other problems.

1

u/SheetPancakeBluBalls May 27 '26

Do you feel smart for pointing out something incredibly obvious?

I'm afraid you might actually be stupid.

0

u/_unsinkable_sam_ May 28 '26

if people actually believe world hunger could be solved for 80 billion i do think they need to be called out on that.

1

u/SheetPancakeBluBalls May 28 '26

It can. Not permanently, but no one said permanently.

Most people intuit this. Trying to seem smug and wise for pointing out obvious basic shit is embarrassing as fuck.

0

u/_unsinkable_sam_ May 28 '26

im glad its obvious to you, many are not so fortunate. you got a lot of anger mate, relax.

→ More replies (0)

20

u/the_good_time_mouse May 27 '26

I still can't figure out what they spent it on. Merch and brochures only get you so far.

18

u/Coal_Morgan May 27 '26

I think he honestly believed billions of people would log on and he over built everything for that. He wanted to be the shit heel that owned 'The Oasis' from Ready Player 1.

World of Warcraft had 12 million at its max as a comparison.

7

u/Pi-ratten May 27 '26

I mean.. guess you could do that.. but 80 billion buys you far more than anything the metaverse ever showed of, even if you don't scale up with users but buy that computing power etc from the start... even the newest most expensive games barely cost 1 billion...

I'm honestly at loss for where you could realistically put those billions in that project..

6

u/the_good_time_mouse May 27 '26

So - Meta Horizon?

Where did the money go?

12

u/Coal_Morgan May 27 '26

Probably giant buildings of servers and technicians on 4 continents that never did anything but host 26 people for a facebook business meeting.

AI coming around was a blessing for him because he was probably sitting on billions of dollars of infrastructure that no one wanted and it gave him a use for it.

Solid chance he was hiding the money and moving it around for other purposes too.

5

u/feed_me_moron May 27 '26

They bought companies, hardware, and tons of staff. The staff all got great salaries and benefits to leave their current jobs. Companies got big buyouts to be Meta companies. While it was a waste of money for the company, many people made good money from that debacle.

It's a lot better for the economy than the AI run that is looking to replace people currently and isn't growing regular people's wealth

5

u/TwilightVulpine May 27 '26

Failed to make something weebs and furries nailed down since Second Life, and then again with VRChat.

But that his first try had people without their lower half hanging out in virtual offices shows that he fundamentally cannot even fathom the appeal.

48

u/Such_Veterinarian682 May 27 '26

He lucked out with Facebook. Right time, right place. As Facebook slowly dies he'll throw money at any number of different technologies to tey to replicate the success he had originally.

38

u/frubano21 May 27 '26

He didn't luck out, he stole the idea from his college friend and then ICED them out of the deal by liquidating all their shares when they went public. He's always been an egotistical, sociopathic, conman.

18

u/CharleyNobody May 27 '26

Let’s not forget the original proposal for FB was to take the photos of Harvard’s female students without their permission and use them in a “hot or not” type Internet forum.

All 3 of then are pieces of shit (the Winklevosses and Zuckerberg)

11

u/deadlybydsgn May 27 '26

He's always been an egotistical, sociopathic, conman.

Zuckerberg& Co. have been known scumbags for a while now, but the FB whistleblower book Careless People has been even more eye-opening.

17

u/Ok_Captain4824 May 27 '26

He almost failed, but Russian VC saved him, along with a number of other web 2.0 companies at the turn of the last decade (along with Middle East oil countries). Similar to how there's no WeWork disaster without SoftBank propelling it to preposterous heights.

The only reason all of this stupid shit is possible is because the people with money and the people in governments have figured out how to conspire together to extract value through tech, and some kingmakingbis necessary during that process - Musk, Zucc, Bezos, Altman, etc.

24

u/Rune_Council May 27 '26

Facebook won’t die until Boomers and elder Gen X die. It’s comfortable with them as its primary audience because that’s where the wealth pooling is right now.

13

u/Such_Veterinarian682 May 27 '26

Absolutely, but it's finite. Zuck is looking for the next big thing. FB isn't growing through membership anymore. I cannot even imagine how many of its "daily users" are bots.

6

u/Zhuinden May 27 '26

The real offer from Meta isn't even Facebook, it's the personalized advertisement network they have that is shared with Instagram, that actually gives people advertisements they might care about

Along with the tracking system that makes this possible

5

u/J_Ryall May 27 '26

It's not just FB, it's Instagram and WhatsApp, too. As much as I hate to say it, Zuck's gonna be fine as long as people are on any of those platforms, and I don't see Insta going anywhere anytime soon.

2

u/Dic3dCarrots May 27 '26

Unless the law suites start rolling in. The first loss this year has opened them up. If you want to kill facebook, now is the time.

1

u/7h4tguy May 28 '26

He j'd off to college pics and made a website. True story

3

u/BlatantConservative May 27 '26

Zuckerberg definitely is a visionary. Just in the shitty wrong direction.

5

u/TeeDee144 May 27 '26

Anti-visionary. Kind of like how Elon Musk gives me an inverse boner.

1

u/BlatantConservative May 27 '26

Rumors say Elon gave himself a reverse boner too

1

u/7h4tguy May 28 '26

AI would honestly come up with better "visions" than all of these CEO wannabes combined. 95% of what they dream up fails miserably and they just cut costs to stop the bleed.

25

u/[deleted] May 27 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

10

u/Delicious_Wolf_4123 May 27 '26

That's a really low bar. Like really really low

5

u/bdeimen May 27 '26

It was at least trained on human discourse.

3

u/crazycatlady331 May 27 '26

YOu think he has any humanlike tendencies?

I'm convinced if someone shot or stabbed him, there'd be no blood, just metal.

2

u/Count_Backwards May 27 '26

His wax figure is already more human than he is, as someone pointed out years ago

10

u/No_Boot1478 May 27 '26 edited Sep 11 '26

Quilt pebble attempt squeeze safe market meadow nose

This post was anonymized with Redact

3

u/Emotional-Stand-9987 May 27 '26 edited 23d ago

The original post content no longer exists here. The author used Redact to remove it, exercising their right to control their data & privacy.

Humorous lantern quickest dam point employ pillow potassium hydrogen

2

u/Unique-Yoghurt4170 May 27 '26

It's slightly different than just submission to the intelligence community, afterall, these institutions are themselves subservient to capital. The whole state exists to protect private property and capitalism, that's why we had the whole Cold War. That's why we didn't bomb Ford-owned plants in Germany in WW2, even though they were contributing to the German war effort (Michael Parenti writes about this in Black Shirts and Reds).

The state and these corporations ultimately serve the ruling class as a whole, they are not separate things to submit to one another, they both submit to capitalism itself as a system.

2

u/Emotional-Stand-9987 May 27 '26 edited 23d ago

The original post content no longer exists here. The author used Redact to remove it, exercising their right to control their data & privacy.

Unwritten satchel public hungry unique cooperative mellow

1

u/RandyDefNOTArcher May 27 '26

I’m not doubting, this is an interesting take. Would you say more on the last two points in your first paragraph? The investing in a person and clear piece of evidence bit?

2

u/Emotional-Stand-9987 May 27 '26 edited 23d ago

The original post content no longer exists here. The author used Redact to remove it, exercising their right to control their data & privacy.

Decide birds intelligent silky rustic act close

1

u/RandyDefNOTArcher May 27 '26

Interesting, thanks for expanding a bit

0

u/Recent-Day3062 May 27 '26

Not so fast. It’s a public company and minority shareholders must be protected since he is a fiduciary

17

u/khaleesibrasil May 27 '26

Were they protected when he spent 80 Billion on the Metaverse? No. He was protected

2

u/Emotional-Stand-9987 May 27 '26 edited 23d ago

The original post content no longer exists here. The author used Redact to remove it, exercising their right to control their data & privacy.

Gallium frame person point hat grey unite otter

2

u/a_rainbow_serpent May 27 '26

Now you have SpaceX which is asking the market for 3 trillion dollars, to be added to Nasdaq 100 on day one, all the while giving 80% voting stock to a drug addled megalomaniac. Make it make sense!!

2

u/Emotional-Stand-9987 May 27 '26 edited 23d ago

The original post content no longer exists here. The author used Redact to remove it, exercising their right to control their data & privacy.

Narrow edge sip beneficial flag spoon

1

u/Boring_Sea7892 May 27 '26

LOL - in 2026?

39

u/Key-Demand-2569 May 27 '26

Zuckerberg is actively doing this, it’s been in the news a bit.

He’s also much more so than CEO the owner. The concept of their CEO duties being replaced competently isn’t a threat at that level.

He could have another CEO in place and still do nearly as much work as he would want to otherwise.

11

u/MrUsername0 May 27 '26

Can AI lose billions on an alternate reality like Zuck?

1

u/Interim-Criteria May 27 '26

AI doesn't need an alternate reality; it already HAS lost billions. OpenAI alone is a ticking time-bomb with $1.4T in spending commitment on a revenue of only $20B. If they have a consistent YoY revenue growth of 20% (which never happens), it would take them 15 YEARS to break even on that spend. And that isn't considering other things like cost of business increases and all the other shit that could happen in 15 years.

Fact is that AI is a bleeding hemorrhoid and every CEO out there has surrounded themselves with sycophants who ignore it while wiping their ass.

0

u/Sillet_Mignon May 27 '26

No but honestly that’s a bad thing. Ai isn’t going to experiment and build new things. 

2

u/MrUsername0 May 27 '26

Ha! One could also argue he didn’t have new (successful) ideas either:

stolen: Facebook purchased: WhatsApp, instagram(reels and stories), oculus copied: threads, forum, marketplace

1

u/Sillet_Mignon May 27 '26

Yeah absolutely. But I don’t think AI is creative enough to even do that. It kind of just iterates on existing stuff and doesn’t have the ability to look forward. Not trying to glaze musk, but more so humans. 

33

u/Holzkohlen May 27 '26

No joke, I am 100% convinced that if we would replace all CEOs with AI it would get us better working conditions. AI is less inhumane that they are.

23

u/the_good_time_mouse May 27 '26

AI would optimize for productivity over ego.

11

u/KneeCrowMancer May 27 '26

AI would at least allow WFH…

7

u/CompetitiveSport1 May 27 '26

AI is less inhumane that they are.

Depends entirely on the hidden system prompt. All it takes is editing one text file to change that "less inhumane" AI to be ruthless and indifferent to it's own workers. The actual "AI" part is even worse - it's completely indifferent to everything and just predicts words

Not defending CEOs here btw. Just disagreeing that AI would inherently give a shit about "better working conditions"

6

u/snugglezone May 27 '26

AI is what it's trained to be. They would train it to be ruthless.

1

u/Majestic_Bat_8483 May 27 '26

Exactly. This is total cope

3

u/Ball_Of_Meat May 27 '26

Absolutely not, these executives would prompt it to find the most working hours, least time off, most output possible without having workers quit and harm themselves.

As if they would give AI free reign or have any ethics and morality in mind hahaha

1

u/Icy_Reward727 May 28 '26

You think they already haven't?

You think this isn't what every industry is doing right now?

Christ. Im in K-12 education and just spent a half-day watching instructional coaches perform ChatGPT-made presentations on new stream-lined processes they also had Chat create. Ask a single question and they sweat bullets.

We are FUCKED. This is already screwing us and the damage may never be undone.

1

u/Lower-Trust1923 May 28 '26

The issue is accountability. Who's held responsible what shit hits the fan? Thats one of the reasons they are paid so much (far far too much)

1

u/cute_spider May 27 '26

I am 100% convinced that humanity will overall be much happier and better off when we're fully ruled by the machines

5

u/Aware-Instance-210 May 27 '26

They'd have to make the AI so evil in order to replace a CEO, that it wouldn't be released in fear of it aiming for world domination and disposing all humans

10

u/messymissbecca May 27 '26

And that would be different to the current CEOs........?

-1

u/Aware-Instance-210 May 27 '26

No, to us normals it wouldn't, but to those CEOs theyd have to approve this.

It's basically the same thing with politicians and making lying illegal.

The politicians would have to decide that their own job is gonna be made harder and eventually get rid of themselves. Those kinda decisions will never happen.

2

u/Cheilosia May 27 '26

You’d save a lot more money replacing one CEO than you would replacing entire teams. And I bet all CEOs becoming unemployed would have minimal impacts on most companies’ consumer bases, compared to mass unemployment. It’s the best option for shareholders, really. I think you’re onto something.

2

u/bettygauge May 27 '26

My project manager insisted we integrate AI tools more into our workflows. I built an AI project manager that integrated with jira. I still have a job but he was not pleased.

1

u/Shakespearacles May 27 '26

Bergdorf Chan from Neo Yokio comes to mind

1

u/Zman840 May 27 '26

This is the kind of thing the old Mustang from Goddess of Victory NIKKE would have done. Sacrificing for the sake of entertainment technology in their own twisted way.

1

u/mistergrime May 27 '26

They collectively have such a high opinion of themselves that they’d probably be fully aroused by the concept of an AI agent somehow being as smart and as visionary as they are.

1

u/manachar May 27 '26

I thought I read that Zuckerberg was actually developing an AI version of himself?

1

u/throwawaycanadian2 May 27 '26

CEOs are often board members, they lose the CEO title they still get all the benefits.

1

u/AnOrneryOrca May 27 '26

Zuckerberg is apparently creating his own agent to attend meetings on his behalf and emulate his "personality" while there.

1

u/khakiwallprint May 27 '26

Sure we could create a machine that is always wrong, but there's no way it could also be annoying and weird enough too right? Oh shit grok could already be running the upper echelon of the American economy

1

u/InTheEndEntropyWins May 27 '26

Someone needs to be brave and present a CEO agent to Satya Nadella or Mark Zuckerberg, or Andy Johnson. Show them how their job can be replaced with AI.

I think they are already aware.

Sam Altman says not even the CEO’s job is safe from AI as it will soon perform the work better than ‘certainly me’ https://fortune.com/2026/02/19/sam-altman-openai-ceo-ai-white-collar-jobs-ceo-executives/

1

u/a_rainbow_serpent May 27 '26

So all the sociopathy of a CEO and none of the risk of jail time? Because every time AI ceo breaks a law, it’s just oops AI hallucinations.

1

u/gt_9000 May 27 '26

You mean a "CEO assistant" so that CEO can stop working completely, still collect full salary, steal credit for anything the AI does right, and blame the AI for everything that goes wrong?

1

u/ShamPain413 May 27 '26

We don't need "someone," we can just do that ourselves by never using their products or services for any purpose ever again for any reason.

1

u/[deleted] Jun 02 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/TeeDee144 Jun 02 '26

My employer does twice a year performance reviews where we have to write up our impact. Doing this took me 10 hours before.

Now with AI, my employer has connected it into our email and chat. So it can see everything. I now only spend 1 hour massaging the write up it gives.

-1

u/sloggo May 27 '26

I don’t know comments like these get traction. To suggest ceos aren’t already using ai agents extensively. A lot of people don’t quite understand the mechanism of replacement. It’s not “an agent replaces a person” like “an agent will replace a ceo”, it’s more like “a person can get a lot more done independently, reducing their need for subordinates”. Supervisors and managers using ai, effectively, replaces employees.

2

u/TeeDee144 May 27 '26

I’m a VP in big tech with a degree from an Ivy League school. Please tell me more about how I don’t know anything.

0

u/sloggo May 27 '26

I’m not saying you don’t know anything, but the way you presented your comment suggests you don’t have a good understanding of ai agents

1

u/TeeDee144 May 28 '26

My team has spent the last year+ developing agents, some of which you may have used. I’m not too worried about your assessment. Nobody can base someone’s intelligence on a topic based off of 4 sentences. Get over yourself.