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

Mark Zuckerberg freezes AI hiring amid bubble fears

telegraph.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

831–840 of 936 posts

Re: Mark Zuckerberg freezes AI hiring amid bubble fears

#831

Post by fluoridation »

HarHarVeryFunny wrote: post #830
fluoridation wrote: post #791

Earlier quoted context omitted.

None of what you've said contradicts it's a general graph instead of, say, a DAG. It doesn't rule out cyles either within a single layer or across multiple layers. And even if it did, the brain is not just the neocortex, and the neocortex isn't isolated from the rest of the topology.

It's a specific architecture. Of course there are (massive amounts) of feedback paths, since that's how we learn - top-down prediction and bottom-up sensory input. There is of course looping too - e.g. thalamo-cortical loop - we are not just as pass-thru reactionary LLM! Yes, there is a lot more structure to the brain than just the neocortex - there are all the other major components (thalamus, hippocampus, etc) each…

Did I say "random graph", or did I say "general graph"?

>There is of course looping too - e.g. thalamo-cortical loop - we are not just as pass-thru reactionary LLM!

Uh-huh. But I was responding to a comment about how the brain doesn't do something analogous to back-propagation. It's starting to sound like you've contradicted me to agree with me.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg freezes AI hiring amid bubble fears

#832

Post by KaiserPro »

toephu2 wrote: post #636
KaiserPro wrote: post #273

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Its all in RSUs Supposedly, all people that join meta are on the same contract. They also supposedly all have the same RSU vesting schedules as well. That means that these "rockstars" will get a big sign on bonus (but its payable back inside 12 months if they leave) then ~$2m every 3 months in shares

It's not even in RSUs. No SWEs/researchers are getting $100M+ RSU packages. Zuck said the numbers in the media were not accurate. If you still think they are, do you have any proof? any sources? All of these media articles have zero sources and zero proof. They just ran with it because they heard Sam Altman talk about it and it generates clicks.

Oh they aren't getting 100m, but directors are getting something close to 25m.

I suspect some "strong" hires will be on 75m

Source; my company was bought by facebook. (no I didn't get fuck you money. )

Re: Mark Zuckerberg freezes AI hiring amid bubble fears

#834

Post by colejohnson66 »

ath3nd wrote: post #751
aspenmayer wrote: post #737

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That was my point, if someone thinks that Meta is overvalued, they can put their money where their mouth is. The fact that the share price hasn’t cratered is a kind of collective belief in the opposite.

Edgy prediction: Meta is irrelevant and on a path to even further irrelevancy, and, fingers crossed, a bankruptcy or at least Zuck being removed as the main man

"The Zuck" can't be removed — he has more the 60% of the votes![0] The board stupidly voted to do so a few years ago.

[0]: He only has about 13% of the shares, but the dual allocation means that his class B shares are worth 10 votes. And he owns 99% of those shares. https://observer.com/2023/06/mark-zuckerberg-2023-shareholde...

Re: Mark Zuckerberg freezes AI hiring amid bubble fears

#835

Post by Hilift »

ipnon wrote: post #289
Hilift wrote: post #215

META has only made $78.7 billion operating income in the past 12 months of returns. Time to buckle up! https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/META/financials/

It's really difficult to wrap one's head around the cash they're able to deploy.

At the current price of $107,586 per kilo of gold, that is 731,507 kilos of gold per year. A rail box car has a load limit of 92,500 kilos. Eight full box cars, or 16 half full box cars of gold currently represents the annual output of META.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg freezes AI hiring amid bubble fears

#836

Post by cyanydeez »

bryanlarsen wrote: post #738
cyanydeez wrote: post #598

Earlier quoted context omitted.

the problem is ISP became a Utility, not some fountain of unlimited growth. What you're arguing is that AI is fundamentally going to be a utility, and while that's worth a floor of cash, it's not what investors or the market clamor for. I agree though, it's fundamentally a utility, which means theres more value in proper government authority than private interests.

Sears started Prodigy to become Amazon, not Comcast.

The product itself determines wether ita a utility, not the business interest. Assuming democracy works correctly. Only a dysfunctional government ignores natural monopolies.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg freezes AI hiring amid bubble fears

#837

Post by jstgunderscore »

chatmasta wrote: post #425
boringg wrote: post #257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wage suppression? Its the opposite were talking about here. Pay large amounts of money to make sure people don't work on challenging problems. But sure you cant try and argue that's wage suppression.

The comment I was responding to was implying that it would be better for the collective if Meta was not paying these exorbitant salaries. You said “it [paying high salaries] is a great way to kneecap collective growth and development.” In other words, you’re suggesting that _not_ paying high salaries would be good for collective growth and development. And if Meta is currently willing to pay these salaries, but didn’…

Wage suppression is anytime a worker makes less than the absolute maximum an employer is willing to pay? That would include just about everyone making a paycheck.

Based on my cursory knowledge of the term, wage suppression here would be if FB manipulated external factors in the AI labor market so that their hire would accept a "lowball" offer.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg freezes AI hiring amid bubble fears

#838

Post by jstgunderscore »

MOARDONGZPLZ wrote: post #545
spjt wrote: post #511

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are most people that money hungry? I wouldn't expect someone like Zuckerberg to understand, but if I ever got to more than a couple million dollars, I'm never doing anything else for the sake of making more money again.

This is a very weird take. Lots of people want to actively work on things that are interesting to them or impactful to the world. Places like Meta potentially give the opportunity to work on the most impactful and interesting things, potentially in human history. Setting that aside, even if the work was boring, I would jump at the chance to earn $100M for several years of white collar, cushy work, purely for the impa…

It's not such a weird take from a perspective of someone who's never had quite enough money. If you've never had enough, the dream is having more than enough, but working for much much more than enough sounds like a waste of time and/or greed. Also, it's hard to imagine pursuing endeavors out of passion because you've never had that luxury.

Re: Mark Zuckerberg freezes AI hiring amid bubble fears

#839

Post by mrtranscendence »

mdemare wrote: post #815
tschwimmer wrote: post #669

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you provide a reference translation or at least call out the issues you see with this passage? I see "far far away in the [time period]" which I should imagine should be "a long time ago" What are the other issues?

- "they were more small than large" (what?) - "even in the thirties little had been done to them" (done to them?) - "Welgelegen Buitenrust Nooitgedacht Rustenburg" (Untranslated!) - "his father had first called it Eleutheria" (his father'd rather called it) - "just as extraordinary does not refer to the ordinary nature of the outside" (complete non-sequitur)

Waar heb je het over? "Welgelegen Buitenrust Nooitgedacht Rustenburg" is volkomen cromulent Engels.

For what it's worth, I do use AI for language learning, though I'm not sure it's the best idea. Primarily for helping translate German news articles into English and making vocabulary flashcards; it's usually clear when the AI has lost the plot and I can correct the translation by hand. Of course, if issues were more subtle then I probably wouldn't catch them ...

Re: Mark Zuckerberg freezes AI hiring amid bubble fears

#840

Post by mrtranscendence »

miki123211 wrote: post #708
deegles wrote: post #523

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We're clearly seeing what AI will eventually be able to do Are we though? Aside from a narrow set of tasks like translation, grammar, and tone-shifting, LLMs are a dead end. Code generation sucks. Agents suck. They still hallucinate. If you wouldn't trust its medical advice without review from an actual doctor, why would you trust its advice on anything else? Also, the companies trying to "fix" issues with LLMs wit…

> If you wouldn't trust its medical advice without review from an actual doctor, why would you trust its advice on anything else? When an LLM gives you medical advice, it's right x% of the time. When a doctor gives you medical advice, it's right y% of the time. During the last few years, x has gone from 0 to wherever it is now, while y has mostly stayed constant. It is not unimaginable to me that x might (and notice…

Microsoft claims that they have an AI setup that outperforms human doctors on diagnosis tasks: https://microsoft.ai/new/the-path-to-medical-superintelligen...

"MAI-DxO boosted the diagnostic performance of every model we tested. The best performing setup was MAI-DxO paired with OpenAI’s o3, which correctly solved 85.5% of the NEJM benchmark cases. For comparison, we also evaluated 21 practicing physicians from the US and UK, each with 5-20 years of clinical experience. On the same tasks, these experts achieved a mean accuracy of 20% across completed cases."

Of course, AI "doctors" can't do physical examinations and the best performing models cost thousands to run per case. This is also a test of diagnosis, not of treatment.

Post reply on HN