Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Hypercapitalism and the AI talent wars

blog.johnluttig.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 256 posts

Re: Hypercapitalism and the AI talent wars

#111

Post by anton-c »

MichaelZuo wrote: post #101
amelius wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, you've got that backwards. In a functioning democracy respecting the rule of law, the government with its laws and regulation are the school teachers who are putting the bullies into detention.

Based on what argument? Just writing your opinion down doesn’t seem relevant to real life government organization. I don’t see how there could be “school teachers” above the majority of congressman or regulatory decision makers. The very existence of pork filled bills thousands of pages long and byzantine regulations suggest that couldn’t possibly be true.

Does every democracy have that problem with bills? I thought it was mostly a US issue.

Re: Hypercapitalism and the AI talent wars

#112

Post by thedevilslawyer »

harimau777 wrote: post #80
aaa_aaa wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Patents and copyrigt laws are immoral.

I think it's a little more nuanced than that. Certainly IP is regularly abused to try to suppress competition/innovation, own our shared culture, create artificial scarcity, etc. However, there's also a need to protect artists and other creatives from having their work scooped up and profited off of by mega corps.

You're taking a nuanced view of fundamental thing and completely missing the point.

Copyright is bad like inheritance is bad. Arguing about good and bad industrialists is missing the point.

Re: Hypercapitalism and the AI talent wars

#113

Post by noosphr »

Xcelerate wrote: post #23

I find the current VC/billionaire strategy a bit odd and suboptimal. If we consider the current search for AGI as something like a multi-armed bandit seeking to identify “valuable researchers”, the industry is way over-indexing on the exploitation side of the exploitation/exploration trade-off. If I had billions to throw around, instead of siphoning large amounts of it to a relatively small number of people, I would…

We saw it happen already with Deekseek.

SV has already thrown it down the memory hole but for a good three months, until everyone else copied their paper, the SOTA reasoning model available to the public was open source, Communist[0] and came out of a nearly defunct Chinese hedge fund.

[0] If you don't believe the communist part just ask it about the American economy.

Re: Hypercapitalism and the AI talent wars

#114

Post by amelius »

MichaelZuo wrote: post #109
amelius wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If your government is corrupt then it doesn't make sense to say that the concept of having a government is dead and that corporations are the solution.

How does this relate to the prior comment?

It relates to it because you chose an example specific to US government which we all know is not a good example.

Re: Hypercapitalism and the AI talent wars

#115

Post by parpfish »

TrackerFF wrote: post #51

Also, the people being hired now for insane sums of money, are being hired because they have deep knowledge in design / implementation of AI models and infrastructure that scale to billions of users. In order to operate on a scale like that, you obviously need to have worked somewhere that has that magnitude of users. That makes the pool of candidates quite small. It’s like building a spaceship. Do you hire the peopl…

With all these mega-offers going out, I object when people saying that they’re paying for “talent”.

These AI folks are good, but not orders of magnitude better than engineers and researchers already working in tech or academia. Lots of folks are capable of building an AI system, the reason they haven’t is that they haven’t been in a situation where they have the time/money/freedom to do it.

These mega offers aren’t about “talent”, they are about “experience”

Re: Hypercapitalism and the AI talent wars

#116

Post by bluefirebrand »

Quarrelsome wrote: post #94
aaa_aaa wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Patents and copyrigt laws are immoral.

however they do result in flows of capitals feeding into otherwise unfundable enterprise like R&D; science and engineering, or culture; writing, music, art. Where's the ROI if you invest millions into R&D and your competitor invests $0 and can then just reproduce your works with their logo ontop of yours? To sack off IP and copyright would significantly narrow innovation and result in many artists, scientists and eng…

> I don't think its as simple as calling them immoral. Rather the immorality comes on them being poorly regulated

I think if behavior needs to be regulated by government in order to be moral, then it's immoral behavior by default

The regulation doesn't make it moral, the regulation only limits the damage by limiting how immoral you're allowed to be

Re: Hypercapitalism and the AI talent wars

#117

Post by AnimalMuppet »

graeme wrote: post #89
bix6 wrote: post #11

“The AI capital influx means that mega-projects no longer seem outlandishly expensive. This is good for the world!” Is it? This whole piece just reads of mega funds and giga corps throwing ridiculous cash for pay to win. Nothing new there. We can’t train more people? I didn’t know Universities were suddenly producing waaaay less talent and that intelligence fell off a cliff. Things have gone parabolic! It’s giga mega…

>We can’t train more people? I didn’t know Universities were suddenly producing waaaay less talent and that intelligence fell off a cliff. University enrolment is actually set to sharply decline. It's called the Demographic Cliff: https://www.highereddive.com/news/demographic-cliff-colleges...

Off topic, but: Supply and demand says that, if university enrollment drops sharply, the price of a university education should go down. That sounds like good news to me.

Re: Hypercapitalism and the AI talent wars

#118

Post by [deleted] »

Nasrudith wrote: post #48
blitzar wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is something immoral about a company saying "we are going to spend $100bn this year on building a LLM" The icing on the cake is when all their competitors say "so will we".

All this time complaining about companies not investing in research and development for future prosperity and now when they actually do so it is suddenly outright immoral?

[deleted]

Re: Hypercapitalism and the AI talent wars

#119

Post by amarait »

thedevilslawyer wrote: post #112
harimau777 wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it's a little more nuanced than that. Certainly IP is regularly abused to try to suppress competition/innovation, own our shared culture, create artificial scarcity, etc. However, there's also a need to protect artists and other creatives from having their work scooped up and profited off of by mega corps.

You're taking a nuanced view of fundamental thing and completely missing the point. Copyright is bad like inheritance is bad. Arguing about good and bad industrialists is missing the point.

I agree. Its very difficult to find people who agree with this

Re: Hypercapitalism and the AI talent wars

#120

Post by ewuhic »

AnimalMuppet wrote: post #117
graeme wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>We can’t train more people? I didn’t know Universities were suddenly producing waaaay less talent and that intelligence fell off a cliff. University enrolment is actually set to sharply decline. It's called the Demographic Cliff: https://www.highereddive.com/news/demographic-cliff-colleges...

Off topic, but: Supply and demand says that, if university enrollment drops sharply, the price of a university education should go down. That sounds like good news to me.

In a homo economicus world. They will jack the prices up for the remaining few.
Post reply on HN