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

AI.gov

ai.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 266 posts

Re: AI.gov

#231

Post by Rafuino »

jjcm wrote: post #94

The Presidential Innovation Fellow is the highest level role they're offering as part of this. For this, the requirements are "mid-senior/executive career professional experience in a subject matter expertise" with "experience collaborating with and leading cross-functional teams". The requirements feel analogous to a staff/principal level role in the software industry, so just for comparison here's the compensation…

US gov hiring is absolutely broken. I applied for a role I'm absolutely qualified for (even referred to apply for it by someone on the team based on my resume and experience) and was rejected out of hand (twice, after an appeal too) without consideration. I'm actually willing to take a pay cut to serve my country, and I think actually you'll find senior engineers and business leaders willing to do this too, but if red tape or incompetent HR contractors get in the way, you'll lose that talent too.

Re: AI.gov

#232

Post by RIMR »

WD40forRust wrote: post #200
RIMR wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Look at his post history. He recently complained that LLMs are too "woke". So yeah, 100% a racist right winger who didn't have anything of value to say, and decided to just throw shade at immigrants when he saw the opportunity. Good news is that these guys will open their mouths at work and get themselves canned, so we usually only have to worry about them online.

>racist right winger Then there is the suicidally-altruistic left winger.

"Being pro-immigration is suicidal"

A perfectly non-racist statement in a world where context isn't important. A very racist statement in a world where everyone knows that you're saying that foreigners are dangerous.

Re: AI.gov

#233

Post by tomrod »

tomohelix wrote: post #32
godelski wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some of the jobs go up to $180k/yr. That's not too bad considering it doesn't look like it requires DC location. But others like the grad assistant for $22/hr is laughable. Still, I agree there's a problem with salaries not being competitive. I've interned at DOE labs before and lots of people don't stay for long.

I mean the grad assistant is basically a post-doc position isn't it? Considering the stability and perks from a government job, I think that is not too far from market rate. But go up and those 180k jobs would be easily 300-400K in the industry. I doubt anyone who can do that work would be interested in a measly 180K. Unless it comes with a visa...

Which generally aren't hired by the government (unfortunately).

Wage rates should be higher.

Re: AI.gov

#234

Post by myhf »

wslack wrote: post #154
93po wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I assume they're targeting people who aren't competitive candidates for big high paying companies. There's plenty of super mediocre to bad developers out there (myself included) that would never stand a chance applying there. I've been developing software for a decade and the most I've ever made is $110k, and that was in high cost of living areas like Denver and Seattle.

The pay cap is set in law, but you need people sufficiently invested in the mission to forgo a higher possible salary, which isn't possible for everyone (especially folks who might have to support their parents).

It's possible for anyone who can expect to make money from speculation or bribes due to steering policy in a certain direction.

Re: AI.gov

#235

Post by godelski »

tomohelix wrote: post #32
godelski wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some of the jobs go up to $180k/yr. That's not too bad considering it doesn't look like it requires DC location. But others like the grad assistant for $22/hr is laughable. Still, I agree there's a problem with salaries not being competitive. I've interned at DOE labs before and lots of people don't stay for long.

I mean the grad assistant is basically a post-doc position isn't it? Considering the stability and perks from a government job, I think that is not too far from market rate. But go up and those 180k jobs would be easily 300-400K in the industry. I doubt anyone who can do that work would be interested in a measly 180K. Unless it comes with a visa...

> I mean the grad assistant is basically a post-doc position isn't it? Considering the stability and perks from a government job, I think that is not too far from market rate.

At a DOE lab in my second year of PhD I was getting ~$50/hr. When I've interned at other places I've gotten to about $60/hr. That's still below the typical rate of $80-$100/hr for a new grad (we're just talking base salary, no comp or bonuses). Definitely not market rate.

For the $180k, that's a bit tougher. Since this is all cash. I'm not aware of anyone who pays $300k all cash to newly minted PhDs except for Netflix. Otherwise that number is competitive with typical base salaries. But like you say, with equity that number doubles and so isn't competitive that way. There are benefits to a gov job (way more relaxed) but you're turning down a lot of money, that's for sure. And of course, the salaries are only competitive for newly minted PhDS, not for anyone that's been in the field post PhD for 5+ years.

Re: AI.gov

#236

Post by godelski »

UncleOxidant wrote: post #98
godelski wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some of the jobs go up to $180k/yr. That's not too bad considering it doesn't look like it requires DC location. But others like the grad assistant for $22/hr is laughable. Still, I agree there's a problem with salaries not being competitive. I've interned at DOE labs before and lots of people don't stay for long.

Where exactly are you seeing that $180K remote job? When I specify 'remote' on that site only 4 jobs come up. One of them is data scientist, another is IT Specialist and the other two seem administrative. The IT Specialist job is listed at $99K while the other three are around $70K/year.

They have "locations" but there are >200 of them when you just click on the job. I didn't look too closely though

Re: AI.gov

#237

Post by jowea »

tsunamifury wrote: post #31

So far the support of Apple, Google, Microsoft, Facebook and Cisco/Akami have given the US government a business, intelligence, and social engineering platform the likes the world has never seen before, and still people today wildly undervalue its power in the world today. They have effectively deplatformed Europe, South America, the Middle East and Asia, put anyone but China within second reach from a mass data coll…

> The US is now on the verge of the second great breakthrough of mass automation of that data, intelligence and action. I am honestly shocked that this third stage of American Dominance has not be countered by any other nation save China, and even they're only defensively.

As someone who has similar thoughts, I'm not so sure. The EU has been trying for a while. Russia also puts quite a bit of effort into having an Internet that can operate separately from the US.

edit: That still doesn't explain to me why China and Russia don't have stronger pro-Linux (or something) initiatives. Even the middle powers could at least try to have some control over their technological infrastructure.

Re: AI.gov

#238

Post by causalmodels »

azinman2 wrote: post #162
peanuty1 wrote: post #85

Earlier 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?

Isn't the EU currently considering making open source ai developers legally liable for their models?

Re: AI.gov

#239

Post by rockemsockem »

davisr wrote: post #118
jjcm wrote: post #94

The Presidential Innovation Fellow is the highest level role they're offering as part of this. For this, the requirements are "mid-senior/executive career professional experience in a subject matter expertise" with "experience collaborating with and leading cross-functional teams". The requirements feel analogous to a staff/principal level role in the software industry, so just for comparison here's the compensation…

Why did you assume that everyone is motivated by money? After $100k, what difference does it make for one's happiness? Personally, I wouldn't want such a shallow individual working in my government.

Where do you live that you think this comment is remotely correct? Try living comfortably in DC on $100k.

Re: AI.gov

#240

Post by rockemsockem »

junofan wrote: post #117
jjcm wrote: post #94

The Presidential Innovation Fellow is the highest level role they're offering as part of this. For this, the requirements are "mid-senior/executive career professional experience in a subject matter expertise" with "experience collaborating with and leading cross-functional teams". The requirements feel analogous to a staff/principal level role in the software industry, so just for comparison here's the compensation…

Yeah but your country needs you, and that’s actually pretty good pay. I think tech would be a little bit broader if more people considered serving for a year or two.

Who says you can get more done for the country in this role than you could working in a research lab at a tech company? Certainly US advances at companies do A LOT for the country and it's HARD to get anything done in the government. So, for the top AI talent this appears to target, this is the opportunity to get paid way less to accomplish less..... Why would anyone do that?
Post reply on HN