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

Eric Schmidt deleted Stanford interview

youtube.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 144 posts

Re: Eric Schmidt deleted Stanford interview

#91

Post by keiferski »

It will be interesting to see if Schmidt’s comments about the future of AI being mostly a China-US game will come true, or if less powerful models will ultimately be more useful than single centralized powerful ones.

The analogy here might be between nuclear weapons and drones; the former are controlled entirely by a small number of countries, but the latter probably have more of a direct role to play in the future of warfare - and yet aren’t costly or difficult to make at all. The assumption tends to be that the most powerful well-capitalized tech always wins, but I don’t think that is necessarily the case.

Re: Eric Schmidt deleted Stanford interview

#92

Post by valleyer »

dlg wrote: post #72
ChuckMcM wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Eric has a penchant for saying things he thinks before thinking about how they might be heard. He famously said, "There is no privacy, get over it. If you're not doing anything wrong you don't have anything to worry about."

Wasn't that Scott McNealy? (Though, if I recall your bio from previous HN posts, you'd know far better than me.)

Right, Schmidt actually said: "If you have something that you don't want anyone to know, maybe you shouldn't be doing it in the first place."

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2009/12/google-ceo-eric-schmid...

Re: Eric Schmidt deleted Stanford interview

#93

Post by spyke112 »

zooq_ai wrote: post #84
nextos wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lots of great startups have remote teams so this argument by Schmidt is pretty weak. Google is hybrid, not even remote. Also, I don't think that well motivated and engineers work or produce less while WFH. It could be the opposite. Less interruptions are key, as explained in Peopleware . But bad managers love controlling people in open plan offices. Regardless, I found it surprising Schmidt didn't talk about other st…

can you name successful remote-only startups? Yes, I know gitlab, others?

Automattic: The company behind Wordpress. https://automattic.com/

37signals: The company behind Basecamp and Hey. With a founder being the Ruby on Rails creator. https://37signals.com/

Re: Eric Schmidt deleted Stanford interview

#94

Post by wodenokoto »

thrdbndndn wrote: post #18
Spartan-S63 wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From what I understand, it’s over the controversy in his statement about Google losing competitive advantage because they chose work life balance over in-office collaboration.

Genuine question: what would be the refutation of this opinion, if any? Out of options like "Google are not actually losing", "Google are losing but not because they chose work life balance", "Google are, indeed, but so be it", etc.

Google always advertised their workplaces as fun. They pioneered the table tennis at work meme.

So it’s odd for them to blame work life balance, when they have always pushed their work place as more fun, colorful and relaxing than other work places.

Re: Eric Schmidt deleted Stanford interview

#95

Post by mattigames »

keiferski wrote: post #88
mattigames wrote: post #73

> The rich get richer and the poor do the best they can. > The fact of the matter is this is a rich country's game, right? You heard it straight from the wolves mouth folks, don't act surprise when they bite.

This answer was responding to a question about smaller countries competing against China, the US, and larger countries in AI. “The rich” here refers to the richer countries, not people in general. Please read/listen to the link before commenting on out of context sections.

Nothing is out of context, I know exactly the context before posting it here and I did include the full quote "It's a rich _country's_ game".

Re: Eric Schmidt deleted Stanford interview

#96

Post by ackbar03 »

dangus wrote: post #38
ldjkfkdsjnv wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I took this more as Schmidt being disappointed in what Google has become. He really did build Google, its completely valid for him to be mad about the state of the company culture wise.

Or maybe mad that he wasted his life having no work-life balance and then realizing that lots of companies with work-life balance are productive and profitable. I’m ordering something from Europe where the factory is shut down for the entire month of August. I just have to wait an extra month for that item. The company still gets my money because I need the item. I also use a piece of software written by a European c…

What are these companies you speak of? I would like to take them over in a leveraged buyout, chain the employees to their desks, and make an immediate 9% return

Re: Eric Schmidt deleted Stanford interview

#97

Post by enneff »

jdross wrote: post #61
pierrefermat1 wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The biggest difference between him and a "normal smart person" is they realize they have blind spots and choose not to publicly spout opinions on them.

By definition people are not very aware of their blind spots

But the people that we should listen to are.

Re: Eric Schmidt deleted Stanford interview

#98

Post by keiferski »

mattigames wrote: post #95
keiferski wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This answer was responding to a question about smaller countries competing against China, the US, and larger countries in AI. “The rich” here refers to the richer countries, not people in general. Please read/listen to the link before commenting on out of context sections.

Nothing is out of context, I know exactly the context before posting it here and I did include the full quote "It's a rich _country's_ game".

Again, the question was about competition in the ecosystem, not some kind of class warfare thing. He was describing the reality of it, not making a justification. He then went on to describe how other places aren’t allocating the resources that China and the Us are.

The way you framed it, which implies that you didn’t actually watch the video, is that Schmidt was making a comment justifying the rich dominating the poor. It was no such thing.

Re: Eric Schmidt deleted Stanford interview

#99

Post by [deleted] »

inferiorhuman wrote: post #83
goshx wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There are other ways to commute. There are better places to live. See what I did there? Not everyone has better options to commute.

There are better places to live. So? Going into the office makes a clear delineation between my personal and professional life. Working from home means I never get around to doing the things I need to do at home. Working from an office means I leave all (well, most) of that shit at the office. IOW, don't shit where you eat.

[deleted]

Re: Eric Schmidt deleted Stanford interview

#100

Post by flawn »

keiferski wrote: post #91

It will be interesting to see if Schmidt’s comments about the future of AI being mostly a China-US game will come true, or if less powerful models will ultimately be more useful than single centralized powerful ones. The analogy here might be between nuclear weapons and drones; the former are controlled entirely by a small number of countries, but the latter probably have more of a direct role to play in the future o…

Check Leopold Aschenbrenner's work out - he introduced this to the public through AI Safety

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40576466

Post reply on HN