351–360 of 424 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
With the job market being in the state it is in, there will always be people wanting to take their chances. Let's face it and accept that the golden days of people working in tech startup (and soon large companies) are over. RIP 1980 - 2023.
Looking at GDP, the golden age is still right here. https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.MKTP.CD?location... /s
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They don't need to catch up. They just need to be good enough and fast as fuck. Vast majority of useful tasks of LLMs has nothing to do with how smart they are. GPT-5 models have been the most useless models out of any model released this year despite being SOTA, and it because it slow as fuck.
> just need to be good enough and fast as fuck Hard disagree. There are very few scenarios where I'd pick speed (quantity) over intelligence (quality) for anything remotely to do with building systems.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You still need hardware to run open source models. It might eat into OpenAI profit but I doubt it will eat into NVIDIA's If anything more companies in making models business the higher NVIDIA chip demand will be, till we get some proper competition at least. We badly need some open CUDA equivalent so moving off to competition isn't a problem
Nvidia's dream would be for everyone to buy a personal DGX H100 for private local inference. That's where open source could lead. Datacenters are much more efficient in their use of chips.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I agree with you for many use cases, but for the use case I'm focused on (Voice AI) speed is absolutely everything. Every millisecond counts for voice, and most voice use cases don't require anything close to "deep thinking. E.g., for inbound customer support use cases, we really just want the voice agent to be fast and follow the SOP.
If you have a SOP, most of the decision logic can be encoded and strictly enforced. There is zero intelligence involved in this process, it’s just if/else. The key part is understanding the customer request and mapping it to the cases encoded in the SOP - and for that part, intelligence is absolutely required or your customers will not feel „supported“ at all, but be better off with a simple form.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Startups often pay a shitty salary in exchange for a decent chunk of stock options, with the implicit promise that you'll make bank if you work hard and make the company successful. Getting screwed out of your payout by such a totally-not-an-acquisition is wage theft. It's like promising a sales-related bonus at the beginning of the year, and then in December changing the metric to "AI-related sales to the CEO's golf…
Startup options are worthless. The only value most people will ever extract from a startup is the experience they had working there, and the salary that was put in their bank account. I understand that a lot of inexperienced people (like in this thread) think they're going to get rich though. No, it is not "wage theft" to not get rich when the company exits (by whatever means).
> No, it is not "wage theft" to not get rich when the company exits
I don't think anyone in this thread thinks they're gonna get rich by working for a startup. There's a hope that they will, that's why they are working, but there's no expectation. Maybe there's an expectation of getting a nice tidy sum after an exit (in the 5 or 6 figures) but not in the 7 or 8 figures, at least not if they're just employees and not founders.
What's being discussed is a startup exiting for billions of dollars and the employees with equity seeing zero of it.
Working for a startup usually means lower wages and longer hours, for the chance at striking it rich if the company succeeds. If employees don't see anything when the company succeeds, there's literally no upside to working for a startup.
I just stopped my Groq API. Sad to see competition being eaten up by shitty Nvidia. I like their products but Jensen is an absolute mfer with deceitful marketing.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Another example of the growing trend of buying out key parts of a company to avoid any actual acquisition? I wonder if equity holding employees get anything from the deal or indeed if all the investors will be seeing a return from this?
I have a friend who worked in a company that got "not acquired" in a similar deal. She didn't see a dime out of it, and was let off (together with a big chunk of people) within 6 months.
If you exercise your options you have real stock in the company, so I don't see how you can get shafted here.
Did investors do some sort of dividend cash out before employees were able to exercise their options? (Obviously shady, but more about investors/leadership being unethical than the deal structure).
Would love to know more about how this played out.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I wonder if such deals will create employee lawsuits. I'd certainly be looking at legal options if I was one of the founding employees.
>> one of the founding employees If you were an employee, you were not a founder. A founding-employee would be someone who explicitly "invested" time/money into a company without compensation. If you are also an employee earning a wage you better have a written agreement stating what amount was "investment" and what amount was compensated wage.
As an aside, most founders are paid during the entire project. It’s not hard to raise a preseed round to get yourself paid for 6-24 months to work on an idea. If a founder chose to bootstrap - that’s all fine, but let’s not pretend that the employees aren’t taking massive career risks vs “standard” employers.
Groq press release: https://groq.com/newsroom/groq-and-nvidia-enter-non-exclusiv... > Today, Groq announced that it has entered into a non-exclusive licensing agreement with Nvidia for Groq’s inference technology. The agreement reflects a shared focus on expanding access to high-performance, low cost inference. > As part of this agreement, Jonathan Ross, Groq’s Founder, Sunny Madra, Groq’s President, and other member…
Another example of the growing trend of buying out key parts of a company to avoid any actual acquisition? I wonder if equity holding employees get anything from the deal or indeed if all the investors will be seeing a return from this?