“If ChatGPT were an employee”: the video of Cyprien who puts his finger on where it really hurts

Yesterday, during my lunch break, I started a video of Cyprien.

Title: “If ChatGPT was an employee.”

Thought I was going to watch something fun.
I got a slap in the face.

It's the first time I've watched one of his videos.
Yes, he has 14 million subscribers.
Yes, I know, I'm late.

But clearly, I wasn't expecting that.

Excerpt:

A funny video. Exaggerated. But awfully fair.

The format is effective.

It's funny.
It's cartoonish.
It is deliberately excessive.

And yet, it just hits.

Very fair.

We recognize each other quickly.
Agency. Announcers. Executives. Creatives. Musicians. Actors.
And even beyond that.

Because the subject goes far beyond creation or tech.

AI as the perfect employee

In the video, AI is presented as the ideal employee:

— fast
— available
— never tired
— never late
— never on strike
— never in doubt

And above all, able, little by little, to do everyone's work.

Not all of a sudden.
Not violently.

Progressively.

What the video really shows

The movie doesn't just say:
“Be careful, AI is going to replace humans.”

That would be too easy.
And too easy.

It shows something a lot more uncomfortable.

The real slippage

What is shown is a mechanism that we all know:

— we delegate a bit to save time
— then a bit more to reduce costs
— then a little bit more to be more efficient

And by dint of small rational decisions,
we no longer know very well where to put the limit.

There is no specific moment when everything changes.
Just an accumulation.

A criticism of the system, not the technology

What makes the video particularly smart,
It's because it doesn't demonize AI.

She does not say:
“AI is the problem.”

Instead, it shows that:
— it's our decisions that count
— our performance criteria
— our economic reflexes
— our obsession with optimization

AI is just a tell-tale.

An inconvenient ending

The last scene is particularly strong.

It does not shock with violence.
It is shocking in its logic.

It simply pushes the reasoning to the end.
And once you're there, it's hard to look away.

I won't say more so as not to spoiler.

But she is still in the lead.

Why is this video important

Because it asks a real question, without easy morals.

Not:
“Should we use AI or not?”

But:
How far are we ready to delegate?

And above all:
What do we accept to lose in the process?

Conclusion

This video is not an anti-AI manifesto.
Nor is it a tech-savvy plea.

It's a mirror.

A mirror that is sometimes funny.
Sometimes awkward.
Often uncomfortable.

And that's exactly why it works.

If you have 15 minutes, take the time to watch the full version here.
It deserves better than a distracted viewing between emails.

(you can start at 1 min to skip sponsorship.)