Putting someone’s job title in quotes like that is super condescending. It’s bad taste, especially when you make more and you’re commenting on a post where 1,400 of them got laid off.

> Putting someone’s job title in quotes like that is super condescending. It’s bad taste, especially when you make more and you’re commenting on a post where 1,400 of them got laid off.

It's in quotes with an inline description because, while it's the actual job title for the positions in question, it's also a common English word that in most circles would refer to a "hair stylist".

Ascribing negative intentions to minor punctuation and making up biographies about your fellow commentators says more about your bad taste and biases than mine.

The job of a stylist will largely be automated away with AI. There will be a few needed to keep training the machines but it’s a career path akin to the horse and buggy maker.

I'm not convinced of this. We could easily have used software to procedurally generate outfits from a selection of components since the 1980s. Why hasn't this already happened?

The same reason that Jobs (and Ive) were the arbiters of what Apple shipped for many years; you can't program taste or style.

Actually Stitchfix is an interesting example of “human in the loop” AI. The AI makes recommendations to the stylist, who assembles outfits. Presumably the stylist is still adding value or they wouldn’t have them.

Either way, if people can be scammed^Wconvinced into using their own car to make deliveries for a few bucks that barely covers depreciation, then you can definitely find someone to sit on their computer and click through pictures of clothing for less than an SF city livable salary.

You clearly don’t know much about how style jobs work. Sometimes it can be done anywhere, but there is a difference. Like most of the nicer things in life, if you can’t tell the difference, then it’s not for you.

I suppose you think it’s lunacy that hair dressers think they can live in the city as well.