[flagged]
more people should go to america just to annoy this person :p
[deleted]
AI.gov
241–250 of 266 posts
Re: AI.gov
#242Earlier quoted context omitted.
I was recruited by, and damn near did a tour with USDS. I ended up passing on it. They wanted an "entrepreneur in residence" to help drive change, which sounded great to me. Then they did the whole "we need you to keep in a cup" thing. I wouldn't have had any problem passing the test, but I told the recruiter "this is where the change needs to start". There's no way I can attract and retain good technical talent if w…
> Plus, I find the whole "pee in a cup" thing demeaning, intrusive and offensive. Marijuana is still US federally illegal.
That's a matter for law enforcement, not your employer.
Re: AI.gov
#243Earlier quoted context omitted.
Recoding America[1] is an excellent book about this problem, but it extends a lot further than just contractors charging inflated rates. The government itself has a culture that is so averse to trying new things and compliance with existing policy that it's actually dangerous to the careers of civil servants to do anything innovative, because that is one of the only things they can actually be fired for. The solution…
I was recruited by, and damn near did a tour with USDS. I ended up passing on it. They wanted an "entrepreneur in residence" to help drive change, which sounded great to me. Then they did the whole "we need you to keep in a cup" thing. I wouldn't have had any problem passing the test, but I told the recruiter "this is where the change needs to start". There's no way I can attract and retain good technical talent if w…
I had read awhile back this is a big issue for them finding tech talent. Almost like the government is just a really bad corporation
Re: AI.gov
#244Earlier quoted context omitted.
Oh, look at the tortured path that .io dollars take, since it's technically a TLD for an occupied country, being operated by someone (Ethos Capital) with no connection to or permission from the original or current inhabitants. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/.io#History
There is surprisingly still a lot of short-ish .ai urls available by the way, unlike io, the transition from io is still not complete.
Available yes, but many are "premium/aftermarket" pricing now. There is such a high proportion of these names/prices popping up when you do domain search compared to the dominant "Unavailable" of .io or .com.
Source: I've registered .ai names since 2019. I use a 5 and 8 letter fairly common english word for two .ai domains; both were standard pricing originally, but comparable available domains are now >$10k. However, I could probably at best resell my domains for < $1k each, as resell value for .ai is hard once you use them. I guess investor dollars and being seen to do something might due the demand for these premium domain options.
Re: AI.gov
#245Earlier quoted context omitted.
> largely due to the fact that US is relatively permissive towards large income disparities. Actually, its due to a shortage of highly skilled labor/specialists relative to demand. Europe benefits from more advanced math and programming talent as a result of Eastern European and Russian/Ukraine labor availability. US immigration policy puts America at a disadvantage in this regard - something they are weakly trying t…
If you're crossing borders/languages, you're crossing borders/languages. Not sure why the barrier to using Eastern European talent would be appreciable different. (Time zones?) > income inequality agenda No agenda, just analysis. If you increase income inequality, the top earners can earn more.
> Not sure why the barrier to using Eastern European talent would be appreciable different.
I mean, Poland, Czech Republic, Hungary, Romania and Bulgaria are all EU members, which means they have freedom of movement - they don't even require any visa or work permit. Just show up in Western Europe and work. The same is currently temporarily true for Ukrainians.
Compare that to the extreme effort for them to get a green card in the US.
Re: AI.gov
#246Our governments care dearly about "AI safety" (nobody actually knows what that means or is qualified to define it yet) but not a right to privacy.
What else would you expect? Both issues are about power, and I say that in the most matter-of-fact and non-judgemental fashion I can. The US government will effectively defend the privacy of American people as long as it poses a vulneravility, and that is one facet of AI safety. But a "right to privacy" as a domestic matter is different beast and there's clear malalignment.
Re: AI.gov
#247Earlier quoted context omitted.
Good news - you're not, because your tax dollars doesn't pay for much of anything. The US Government has monetary sovereignty and "pays for things" that way.
Then for Christmas, all I want is my gross pay.
Nope, sorry :) -- taxes exist to destroy the supply of money to keep the economy in check.
Re: AI.gov
#248Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Plus, I find the whole "pee in a cup" thing demeaning, intrusive and offensive. Marijuana is still US federally illegal.
That's a matter for law enforcement, not your employer.
OP of comment says they were applying for a federal job. So federal rules apply.
Re: AI.gov
#249Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you're crossing borders/languages, you're crossing borders/languages. Not sure why the barrier to using Eastern European talent would be appreciable different. (Time zones?) > income inequality agenda No agenda, just analysis. If you increase income inequality, the top earners can earn more.
> Not sure why the barrier to using Eastern European talent would be appreciable different. I mean, Poland, Czech Republic, Hungary, Romania and Bulgaria are all EU members, which means they have freedom of movement - they don't even require any visa or work permit. Just show up in Western Europe and work. The same is currently temporarily true for Ukrainians. Compare that to the extreme effort for them to get a gree…
Thanks.
Re: AI.gov
#250Earlier quoted context omitted.
European technologists and engineers are hamstrung by EU regulations.
Is it really regulation? Or is it financing, laws about firing, cultural approaches to work, or a myriad of other differences?
> Or is it financing, laws about firing, cultural approaches to work, or a myriad of other differences?
You could argue chicken or egg, but many of those are regulation-related.