this post was submitted on 31 Jul 2026
246 points (99.2% liked)

Technology

86757 readers
3110 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
L3s@lemmy.world
enu@lemmy.world
technopagan@lemmy.world
L4s@lemmy.world
L3s@hackingne.ws
246
PricewaterhouseCoopers just got caught trying to pass AI slop as authentic research (www.techspot.com)
submitted 12 hours ago by Some_Emo_Chick@lemmy.world to c/technology@lemmy.world
17 comments fedilink hide all child comments
top 17 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Insekticus@aussie.zone 10 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

This is the end-point of capitalism: the ultra-wealthy just allowed to run these organizations and only pay an utterly negligible fee for their transgressions.

It's going to keep happening and more and more often, because the oligarchs have finally completely taken over the global political theatre. Without a global revolution from the workers, we will end up going backwards and undoing everything.

[–] MangoCats@feddit.it 3 points 6 hours ago

This kind of slop for research has been passed around for decades. In the 1990s I read a "corporate intelligence report" on a company I was working for, it was 90% incorrect and 40% far far off target. Over the years I had several occasions to read and check these kinds of business research reports and they'd rarely even get the things that were published in the quarterly reports right, anything beyond that kind of public information was a lot of speculation, most of it wrong.

[–] ToiletFlushShowerScream@piefed.world 54 points 10 hours ago (3 children)

At this point it isn't AI slop, it's got to be major Fraud by PWC. They were paid for in depth meticulous analyses, and instead, they just asked their drunk uncle AI, who claims to know everything, but really just has the knack to BS a halfway believeable answer.

[–] MangoCats@feddit.it 4 points 6 hours ago

To be fair, AI slop is probably higher quality information than the "in depth meticulous analyses" these kind of clowns have been peddling for thousands of dollars for the past 40+ years.

[–] cavitationfetishist01@quokk.au 13 points 10 hours ago (2 children)

Why are these companies still operational?

[–] greyscale@lemmy.grey.ooo 14 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

inertia, and management globally being unable to make a decision on its own, and wanting to outsource it.

[–] cavitationfetishist01@quokk.au 0 points 9 hours ago* (last edited 9 hours ago) (1 children)

You're not wrong, but j feel like people have been so slipped up by a century of neoliberalism and education cuts, 20 years of social media, and five years of chatgpt+wsb/bettingmarkets, that there's no solution left to anything but violence. I hate that shit.

Some of these problems could be solved other ways,but they require much more sophisticated coordination and the capitalists have just digested it out.

[–] GreenBeard@lemmy.ca 3 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

The reality is no one person is qualified to "run" a multinational megacorp. Not a single human being knows enough for this level of complexity, but the only reason any of them can justify the ungodly amount of marginal return they take is to pretend they're super-geniuses while relying on 'consultant' teams to do the actual thinking, and also keep it quiet that they're no more competent than the janitor they're making 1000x the salary of (all in stock options of course, but 1000x nonetheless).

All of this would work better if the "bosses" could accept they aren't demigods, that the domain expertise to make collective decisions is within their existing org charts and they just need to step down off their high horses and remember they are just a cog in a much bigger machine that makes its own decisions with or without their input. They're self-important sales reps, with just enough of a grasp of finance to be dangerous to themselves and others. I'm sure me and my 10 closest colleagues would also be inclined to say we do a billion $ of work every day if we were writing our own bonus agreements. We just wouldn't have the hubris to convince ourselves it's true.

[–] MangoCats@feddit.it 0 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

The reality is no one person is qualified to “run” a multinational megacorp. Not a single human being knows enough for this level of complexity

This was true of the United States of America in 1789, but still you need a leader. A leader like Buzz Lightyear, he's "always sure." Confidently pursuing a plausible, coherent path has value, even when it's not the optimal path - difficult to see, the future is, always in motion - direction by committee of "the best people" has its place, but so does decisive leadership.

[–] GreenBeard@lemmy.ca 1 points 5 hours ago

No, what you need is something that can facilitate coordination and communication between many moving parts, inspire confidence in the team, create stability, and sell a vision to generate investment, and those functions do not necessarily all need to be one person. You do not "need" a leader, you want a leader because it's easier to conceptualize a relationship with a figurehead. Much like the rump English monarchy, the executive is a vestigial appendage and an artifact of of an aristocratic era of patronage. Locking in a coherent direction does not require a "decider", there are other ways to achieve that. By designing companies to minimize personal liability and accountability, they have also designed themselves out of a useful role.

[–] Einskjaldi@lemmy.world 2 points 6 hours ago

There's only one big accounting firm left, what are you going to do, fire them?

[–] MalReynolds@piefed.social 6 points 9 hours ago

Plausible deniability in a can. Same shit, different day.

[–] Arancello@aussie.zone 21 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

not at all surprised. another of the big four got caught in australia and had to refund fees charged.

[–] MangoCats@feddit.it 2 points 5 hours ago

Cry me a river. These kinds of "business intelligence" reports have been overpriced, near zero value slop since they started publishing them (a long long time ago.)

[–] MrSulu@lemmy.ml 1 points 6 hours ago

Strategic Investigations and multi site analysis, cross referenced with some other made up shit, reveals that this was statistically unlikely.

[–] starchylemming@lemmy.world 7 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

PisswaterhouseCoomers

[–] Some_Emo_Chick@lemmy.world 2 points 7 hours ago

PriceWaterhouseCucks