CT's economy might be more exposed to AI displacement than almost any state. Insurance, lawyers, finance, etc.
Aetna, Cigna, Travelers and Charter all cut jobs this year. None of them said AI was the reason.
I work in audience development/publishing and this has been one of the bigger conversations internally around the Google AI push.
For years, publishers could survive platform shifts because Google still sent readers outward to the rest of the web. That assumption is starting to change.
The obvious argument for AI answers is convenience for users. But if fewer people click through to the sites doing the reporting, writing, reviewing and publishing, what happens to the ecosystem producing that information over time?
Curious how people here are thinking about it.
A year ago someone on here asked “how is this legal?” after noticing a sitting CT state senator worked for Eversource while serving.
I looked into CT's ethics rules and the answer is basically: the law was written to allow it.
Went down a rabbit hole on Eversource, PURA, the legislature and how CT defines conflicts of interest. Not surprising but still wild.
Stewart has plummeted in polling and the prediction markets but New Britain saw this coming before the rest of us.
The same thing happened last year too. The Senate passed a bill that would've put rules on AI hiring, chatbots/kids and the frontier models. It had some meat on the bones. The House never voted on it, session ended. It just disappeared.
Seems like the same thing is happening now with the updated version.
Anyone know if the House is actually planning to take this up?