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

Sam Altman Slams Meta’s AI Talent Poaching: 'Missionaries Will Beat Mercenaries'

wired.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

541–550 of 734 posts

Re: Sam Altman Slams Meta’s AI Talent Poaching: 'Missionaries Will Beat Mercenaries'

#541

Post by tom_m »

hardwaresofton wrote: post #264
burroisolator wrote: post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

AI only got big, especially for coding, because they were able to train on a massive corpus of open source code. I don't think it is a coincidence.

Another funny possibly sad coincidence is that the licenses that made open source what it is will probably be absolutely useless going forward, because as recent precedent has shown, companies can train on what they have legally gained access to. On the other hand, AGPL continues to be the future of F/OSS.

And illegally too. Anthropic didn't pay for those books they used.

It's too late at this point. The damage is done. These companies trained on illegally obtained data and they will never be held accountable for that. The training is done and they got what they needed. So even if they can't train on it in the future, it doesn't matter. They already have those base models.

Re: Sam Altman Slams Meta’s AI Talent Poaching: 'Missionaries Will Beat Mercenaries'

#542

Post by dmoy »

elif wrote: post #517

I've seen paying people too much completely erode the core of teams. It's really hard to convince yourself to work 60 hour weeks when you have generational FU$ and a family you love.

Man I disagree with this on multiple points:

I wouldn't describe a team full of people who don't want to work 60 hour weeks as "eroded", cus like... That's 6x 10 hour days leaving incredibly little time for family, chores, unwinding, etc. Once in awhile maybe, but sustained that'll just burn people out.

And also by that logic, is every executive paid $5M+/yr in every company, or every person who's accumulated say $20M, also eroding their team? Or is that only applied to someone who isn't managing people, for some reason?

Re: Sam Altman Slams Meta’s AI Talent Poaching: 'Missionaries Will Beat Mercenaries'

#543

Post by tom_m »

jorvi wrote: post #303
hardwaresofton wrote: post #264

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Another funny possibly sad coincidence is that the licenses that made open source what it is will probably be absolutely useless going forward, because as recent precedent has shown, companies can train on what they have legally gained access to. On the other hand, AGPL continues to be the future of F/OSS.

Yup. The book torrenting case is pretty nuts. If I can reproduce the entirety of most books off the top of my head and sell that to people as a service, it's a copyright violation. If AI does it, it's fair use. Pants-on-head idiotic judge.

Yea, that dipshit judge just opened the flood gates for more problems. The problem is they don't understand how this stuff works and they're in the position of having to make a judgement on it. They're completely unprepared to do so.

Now there's precedent for future cases where theft of code or any other work of art can be considered fair use.

Re: Sam Altman Slams Meta’s AI Talent Poaching: 'Missionaries Will Beat Mercenaries'

#544

Post by gosub100 »

elif wrote: post #517

I've seen paying people too much completely erode the core of teams. It's really hard to convince yourself to work 60 hour weeks when you have generational FU$ and a family you love.

That's why CEO pay is so low. They take the honor in leadership and across the board just take a menial compensation package. Why work hard , 60 hrs a week even, if you get paid FU$? This is why boards limit comp packages so aggressively.

Re: Sam Altman Slams Meta’s AI Talent Poaching: 'Missionaries Will Beat Mercenaries'

#545

Post by neves »

softwaredoug wrote: post #539

Mercenaries over missionaries. Many employers want employees to act like cult members. But then when going gets tough, those are often the first laid off, and the least prepared for it. Employers, you can't have it both ways. As an employee don't get fooled.

We are not a company, we are a family

Re: Sam Altman Slams Meta’s AI Talent Poaching: 'Missionaries Will Beat Mercenaries'

#546

Post by gosub100 »

derektank wrote: post #366
jorvi wrote: post #303

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yup. The book torrenting case is pretty nuts. If I can reproduce the entirety of most books off the top of my head and sell that to people as a service, it's a copyright violation. If AI does it, it's fair use. Pants-on-head idiotic judge.

>If I can reproduce the entirety of most books off the top of my head and sell that to people as a service, it's a copyright violation. If AI does it, it's fair use. Assuming you're referring to Bartz v. Anthropic, that is explicitly not what the ruling said, in fact it's almost the inverse. The judge said that output from an AI model which is a straight up reproduction of copyrighted material would likely be an expl…

They should still have to pay damages for possessing the copyrighted material. That's possession, which courts have found is copyright violation. Remember all the 12 year olds who got their parents sued back in the 2000s? They had unauthorized copies.

Re: Sam Altman Slams Meta’s AI Talent Poaching: 'Missionaries Will Beat Mercenaries'

#547

Post by dmoy »

999900000999 wrote: post #468
lonesword wrote: post #405

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Facebook is widely hated and embarrassing to work at. Not sure it's widely hated (disclaimer: I work there), despite all the bad press. The vast majority of people I meet respond with "oh how cool!" when they hear that someone works for the company that owns Instagram. "Embarassing to work at" - I can count on one hand the number of developers I've met who would refuse to work for Meta out of principle. They are th…

Honestly I’d be happy to work at any FAANG. Early FB in particular was great in terms of keeping up with friends. I’ve only interviewed with Meta once and failed during a final interview. Aside from online dating and defense I don’t have any moral qualms regarding employment. My dream in my younger days was to hit 500k tc and retire by 40. Too late now

> defense

By defense do you mean like weapons development, or do you mean the entire DoD-and-related contractor system, including like tiny SIBR chasing companies researching things like, uh

"Multi-Agent Debloating Environment to Increase Robustness in Applications"

https://www.sbir.gov/awards/211845

Which was totally not named in a backronym-gymnastics way of remembering the lead researcher's last vacation destination or hometown or anything, probably.

Re: Sam Altman Slams Meta’s AI Talent Poaching: 'Missionaries Will Beat Mercenaries'

#548

Post by softwaredoug »

neves wrote: post #545
softwaredoug wrote: post #539

Mercenaries over missionaries. Many employers want employees to act like cult members. But then when going gets tough, those are often the first laid off, and the least prepared for it. Employers, you can't have it both ways. As an employee don't get fooled.

We are not a company, we are a family

These CEOs will be the first to say "we are a team, not a family" when they do layoffs.

Re: Sam Altman Slams Meta’s AI Talent Poaching: 'Missionaries Will Beat Mercenaries'

#549

Post by kevin_thibedeau »

softwaredoug wrote: post #548
neves wrote: post #545

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We are not a company, we are a family

These CEOs will be the first to say "we are a team, not a family" when they do layoffs.

"I have decided that you need to go spend more time with your family. Really I'm just doing you a favor."

Re: Sam Altman Slams Meta’s AI Talent Poaching: 'Missionaries Will Beat Mercenaries'

#550

Post by somenameforme »

hansvm wrote: post #273
somenameforme wrote: post #260

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The reason Machiavellianism is stupid is that the grand ends the means aim to obtain often never come to pass, but the awful things done in pursuit of them certainly do. So the motivation behind those means doesn't excuse them. And I see no reason the inverse of this doesn't hold true. I couldn't care less if Zuckerburg thinks open sourcing Llama is some grand scheme to let him to take over the world to become its go…

> The reason Machiavellianism is stupid is that the grand ends the means aim to obtain often never come to pass That doesn't feel quite right as an explanation. If something fails 10 times, that just makes the means 10x worse. If the ends justify the means then doesn't that still fit into Machiavellian principles? Isn't the complaint closet to "sometimes the ends don't justify the means"?

You have to assume a grand ends is achievable through some knowable means. I don't see any real reason to think this is the case, certainly not on any sort of a meaningful timeframe. And I think this is even less true when we consider the typical connotation of Machiavellianism, which is through 'evil' actions.

It's extremely difficult to think of any real achievements sustained on the back of Machiavellianism, but one can list essentially endless entities whose downfall was brought on precisely by such.

Post reply on HN