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

Everyone Mark Zuckerberg has hired so far for Meta's 'superintelligence' team

wired.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 60 posts

Re: Everyone Mark Zuckerberg has hired so far for Meta's 'superintelligence' team

#51

Post by UncleMeat »

twoodfin wrote: post #11
weird_trousers wrote: post #3

So much wasted money it makes me sick… There are so much money needed to solve another problems, especially for health. I don’t blame the new comers, but Zuckerberg.

This stuff is ridiculously important for healthcare: It’s a demographic fact that both the US and the world at large are simply not training enough doctors and nurses to provide today’s standard of care at current staffing levels as the population ages. We need massive productivity boosts in medicine just as fast as we can get them.

What huge productivity boosts will this provide that doesn't include "the time you spend with the doctor is shorter than it once was?"

My sister is in a healthcare field. Automatic charting is useful, but not a game changer. Healthcare companies seem to be largely interested in placing AI in between their nurses/doctors and their patients. I'm not terribly excited about that.

Re: Everyone Mark Zuckerberg has hired so far for Meta's 'superintelligence' team

#52

Post by HelloMcFly »

paxys wrote: post #39
hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I sincerely doubt this understaffing of medical professionals is a technology problem, and I believe it much more likely to be an economic structural problem. And overall, I think that powerful generative AI will make these economic structural problems much worse.

It's a gatekeeping problem. Doctors don't want more doctors because it dilutes their own value, so medical school and residency spots are kept artificially limited.

This is oft-repeated truism, but what evidence do you have for this?

Here are some facts:

- Ultimately, the main chokepoint for the number of trained physicians is the number of residency spots. You can cut the price of med school to $0, you'll eventually end up with minimally more fully trained doctors because they need a residency spot.

- Residency spots are paid for by the federal government. Congress controls the number of available spots. Medical professional bodies do not determine this.

- The AMA has consistently asked members to support legislation increasing funding for GME positions (https://www.ama-assn.org/about/leadership/more-medicare-supp...). At one point (late 90s) they opposed expanding the slots, but this has not been true for some time. And, even if it were true, it's ultimately still not their call.

Re: Everyone Mark Zuckerberg has hired so far for Meta's 'superintelligence' team

#54

Post by hn_throwaway_99 »

s1artibartfast wrote: post #23
hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In retrospect, I wonder if the original ethos of the non-profit structure of OpenAI was a scam from the get go, or just woefully naive. And to emphasize, I'm not talking just about Altman. That is, when you create this cutting edge, powerful tech, it turns out that people are willing to pay gobs of money for it. So if somehow OpenAI had managed to stay as a non-profit (let's pretend training didn't cost a bajillion d…

Getting rich going good is better than just getting rich. People like both. Which part are you skeptical about? that people also like to do good, or that AI can do good?

I'm skeptical that OpenAI was ever feasible as a nonprofit under it's original mission, which was:

> Our goal is to advance digital intelligence in the way that is most likely to benefit humanity as a whole, unconstrained by a need to generate financial return. Since our research is free from financial obligations, we can better focus on a positive human impact.

As soon as the power of AI became apparent, everyone wanted (and in some ways, needed) to make bank. This would have been true even if the original training costs weren't so high.

Re: Everyone Mark Zuckerberg has hired so far for Meta's 'superintelligence' team

#55

Post by HardCodedBias »

I'm couldn't be more disgusted by sama@'s response to Zuck's strategy:

23:05 the strategy of a ton of upfront guaranteed comp and that being the reason you tell someone to join like

23:10 really the degree to which they're focusing on that and not the work and not the mission Um I don't think that's

23:17 going to set up a great culture Uh and you know I hope that we can be the best

23:24 place in the world to do this kind of research Uh I think we built a really special culture for it and I think that

23:30 we're set up such that if we succeed at that and a lot of people on our research team believe we will or we're have a

23:36 good chance at it then everybody will do great financially and it's I think it's incentive aligned with like mission

23:42 first and then economic awards and everything else flowing from that So I think that's good There's many things I respect about Meta as a company Um but I

Un hun.

Sam Altman's critique of Meta's recruitment strategy is a textbook example of startup rhetoric. By framing high, guaranteed compensation as a cultural failing that detracts from the "mission," he attempts to moralize a clear economic disadvantage.

This is the core of the startup playbook: persuade employees to forsake their financial best interests in favor of high-risk, high-reward "adventures." There's nothing inherently wrong with that pitch, but the subsequent sanctimony is galling. When talented individuals make a rational choice for their own benefit, Altman's insinuation that they aren't the "people that mattered" is both revealing and repulsive. He's not angry about a breach of principle; he's angry that Zuckerberg is outbidding him.

Sources

Re: Everyone Mark Zuckerberg has hired so far for Meta's 'superintelligence' team

#56

Post by abc_lisper »

HardCodedBias wrote: post #55

I'm couldn't be more disgusted by sama@'s response to Zuck's strategy: 23:05 the strategy of a ton of upfront guaranteed comp and that being the reason you tell someone to join like 23:10 really the degree to which they're focusing on that and not the work and not the mission Um I don't think that's 23:17 going to set up a great culture Uh and you know I hope that we can be the best 23:24 place in the world to do thi…

Well said. Though 20 year old me would have judged you on this comment for being "greedy" ;) Such is the cycle of life - you think you are beyond earthly affairs only to discover earthly affairs matter until you are above the earth

Re: Everyone Mark Zuckerberg has hired so far for Meta's 'superintelligence' team

#57

Post by nevrchanmge »

dang wrote: post #49

Come on everybody, please don't post shallow dismissals. This is in the site guidelines: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html . That includes personal attacks, regardless of who it's about. When a comment has a high bile/information ratio, it's off topic here. You may not owe $CelebrityBillionaire better, but you owe this community better if you're participating in it.

[dead]

Re: Everyone Mark Zuckerberg has hired so far for Meta's 'superintelligence' team

#58

Post by goatlover »

xvector wrote: post #17
weird_trousers wrote: post #3

So much wasted money it makes me sick… There are so much money needed to solve another problems, especially for health. I don’t blame the new comers, but Zuckerberg.

Superintelligence or even just AGI short circuits all our problems.

This is a baseless claim since we have no evidence of AGI/ASI solving all our problems. It's more like wishful thinking.

Re: Everyone Mark Zuckerberg has hired so far for Meta's 'superintelligence' team

#59

Post by smeeger »

paxys wrote: post #41
smeeger wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

im pretty sure that when the top companies are poaching leaders in AI for some of the largest payouts in history… we are not in an AI winter. so they were completely wrong. im guessing you are one of them.

Zuck has spent more on Metaverse than AI. A multi-trillion dollar company throwing a few billion at a problem means nothing. Show me the results, not the hype.

which metaverse poach was paid as much as these poaches?

Re: Everyone Mark Zuckerberg has hired so far for Meta's 'superintelligence' team

#60

Post by smeeger »

lispisok wrote: post #40
smeeger wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

im pretty sure that when the top companies are poaching leaders in AI for some of the largest payouts in history… we are not in an AI winter. so they were completely wrong. im guessing you are one of them.

Bubbles are always the craziest right before they pop

its been craziest for multiple long years now
Post reply on HN