Lots of people saying they don’t like the idea of this here. How many people works at companies whose bottom line is driven by researching website visitors to make their ads unforgettable?
> In late 2017, we and Elon decided the next step for the mission was to create a for-profit entity. Elon wanted majority equity, initial board control, and to be CEO. In the middle of these discussions, he withheld funding. Reid Hoffman bridged the gap to cover salaries and operations.
The Tulsi that pushes Russian disinformation? That should do well for rooting out lying. Also some facts: Intelligence services did not lie us into the Iraq war - politicians did. Politicians manipulated intelligence reporting to fit their narrative. Since you seem to like conspiracy theories, it should be obvious that this was so Halliburton, the company vice president Dick Cheney was CEO of, could profit from government contracts. Guess what CEO will now profit from government contracts due to all the lying from the current slate of politicans.
And by conservative parents as domestic terrorists, I assume you mean the people convicted of crime due to their actual criminal actions on Jan. 6?
Leading tech for a 250 person startup is surely different than wrangling the vast bureaucracy of the US Government, especially when the author says they didn't want to join Atlassian because they would have to deal with "politics" and "NPC coworkers". TBF DOGE as a non-governmental entity is just going to make bullshit recommendations to Trump and not have to actually deal with the consequences of things they recommend, so maybe it would have been perfect for this guy.
Amazon comp is based on your annual performance review (OLR) and your pay band (level + job family). OLR has 5 tiers: least effective, highly valued 1-3, and top tier. Each of those tiers determines your band penetration.
Lets say your pay band is 100-200k. A new hire is theoretically better than 50% of their team, so they join at an HV3 and make 180k. If they receive HV3 at OLR, their total comp target (TCT) remains 180k. If it is their first OLR, they are probably not getting any additional RSUs because the cash-based comp of the first 2 years means they are already at their TCT.
If they made TT, their TCT goes to 200k and they would receive additional RSUs to reach that pay.
If they were HV2 or below, they would not get additional RSUs and their TC would slowly fall from 180k to 160k or below. If it fell below the HV2 level of 160k they would get some RSUs later to bump them back to TCT.
Amazon also assumes the stock will go up 15% year over year, so when RSUs are granted over a multiyear time horizon, you receive less based on assumed growth that would make you reach your TCT.
So the AI has overtaken all code and manual processes within a laboratory environment to hijack the ability to print DNA sequences without anybody saying “man it’s weird that my projects never finish now”? There’s also the modeling vs real-world aspect that Halvar talked about in the submission - the AI needs to do some degree of real world testing to make sure the pathogen properly kills humans. It then needs to distribute that pathogen around the world quickly enough to prevent humans from cutting power.
That’s all incredibly fantastical and sounds vaguely plausible unless you’ve had to interact with bureaucracies.
To your second: I’m not sure that we’re talking about the same thing? If I own $100mm worth of H100s and their electricity, networking, and engineering overhead, I’m very interested in their utilization and return on investment. I’m going to have specific goals and milestones. When those are not met because the AI is doing something else, I’m going to direct introspection (which presumably is what kicks off the reboot in the discussion on point one).
And since you mentioned the poor having to pay higher prices, that highlights the fact that AI is not operating in a vacuum. If AI starts making life that much worse for people, they are going to rise up. FUD works to some degree, but there are always people without Internet or willing to martyr themselves for a cause.
Who built the automated lab that allows it to create a deadly pathogen before someone presses reboot?
I see almost no chance that an AGI starts redirecting resources like energy and compute without someone who has an economic stake in what the AI does noticing and taking action to correct the behavior so they can maintain their investment.
Clearly, since this is OpenAI’s model spec, it is desired by them. If other AI groups publish their own desired behavior, you can make an informed decision as to which model you want to use.
Our scaling is human oriented - add more shifts. Maybe we can adapt new manufacturing methods like screw extrusion mentioned in the article