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

I gave the AI arms and legs then it rejected me

grell.dev

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 419 posts

Re: I gave the AI arms and legs then it rejected me

#91

Post by pentamassiv »

trueismywork wrote: post #83
pentamassiv wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right now it is just a hobby and there are still a number of bugs remaining. Since I don't have an income from it, I can't dedicate more time to it. Hiring me would allow me to work on fixing them full time and make the progress much faster

Do you think they already have hired someone to work on it but are just not releasing the source code?

I don't think so. They use an outdated version straight from crates.io (at least in the publicly available version of Claude Desktop).

Re: I gave the AI arms and legs then it rejected me

#92

Post by mac-mc »

ArcHound wrote: post #11

I'll say it: why would they pay him if he's already doing the work for free from their PoV? Oh, they ignored him. I am not sure if that puts the company in a better light.

Lets make a new license: If you wont hire me, use my library and make over $100m in revenue a year, you must pay a commercial license to use my software equivalent to the total cost (equity grants included) of an average principal engineer or director who manages 50+ people at your company in your highest COL metro, whichever is higher. For OSS work that isn't mostly one author, make it go to the foundation for the OSS project instead and apply the rule to principal maintainers. You could even scale it in multiples of revenue in principle engineer units of $1b per principle engineer of global revenue.

IMO I think foundational projects that every single bigtech uses like ffmpeg should get on this licence yesterday. They would start getting millions because it still would be way cheaper than making it themselves in their bloated cost structures.

Re: I gave the AI arms and legs then it rejected me

#93

Post by dmurray »

trueismywork wrote: post #80
jaccola wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because - They can decide more easily what he works on - They know he loves this work and is very capable of doing it - They can own his output, a competitive advantage - He will likely cost them ~nothing anyway

They probably already have someone working on top of it but it's just closed source because of the license.

But they are hiring someone else to work on it.

> I found out that Anthropic had an open position in the team implementing the secret, unreleased feature of Claude Desktop using enigo

Re: I gave the AI arms and legs then it rejected me

#94

Post by mnmalst »

4gotunameagain wrote: post #34
pentamassiv wrote: post #27

Hey, I'm the author of the blog post. Thank you for submitting this. If you have any questions feel free to ask and please let me know how the writing was. It's one of my first posts so I'd like to improve

Hey mate, I would just like to say that I wish they at least find it in their hearts to reward you for the value you have provided to them. Knowing cut throat american corps, I'm afraid the chances are nil. Even if a good amount for you is peanuts to them. Which is why my position is GPL > MIT..

They could literally give him 100k, 1mil or even 10mil which would still be a rounding error in their books.

Re: I gave the AI arms and legs then it rejected me

#95

Post by pjc50 »

fgbarben wrote: post #78
siva7 wrote: post #47

There is some dirty secret i learned in my time as a eng. manager: Working in open source / Being the maintainer of a popular library / Blogging about software: All this things won't give you necessarily a competitive edge but can work against you. It's counterintuitive but sometimes teams are looking for a more low-profile hire.

This is cope and propaganda to discourage people from developing their own brand. Better for the corporation if the workers have no support structure or reputation that might lead them to quit

"Developing your own brand" is not a scalable solution. There's only ever going to be a few thousand developers who are well enough known to be called a brand.

Re: I gave the AI arms and legs then it rejected me

#96

Post by closewith »

fgbarben wrote: post #78
siva7 wrote: post #47

There is some dirty secret i learned in my time as a eng. manager: Working in open source / Being the maintainer of a popular library / Blogging about software: All this things won't give you necessarily a competitive edge but can work against you. It's counterintuitive but sometimes teams are looking for a more low-profile hire.

This is cope and propaganda to discourage people from developing their own brand. Better for the corporation if the workers have no support structure or reputation that might lead them to quit

> Better for the corporation if the workers have no support structure or reputation that might lead them to quit

That's exactly right.

> This is cope and propaganda to discourage people from developing their own brand.

Not really "cope and propaganda" when it's true, is it?

Re: I gave the AI arms and legs then it rejected me

#98

Post by atoav »

krzkaczor wrote: post #67
siva7 wrote: post #47

There is some dirty secret i learned in my time as a eng. manager: Working in open source / Being the maintainer of a popular library / Blogging about software: All this things won't give you necessarily a competitive edge but can work against you. It's counterintuitive but sometimes teams are looking for a more low-profile hire.

How so? Care to elaborate? I get that bloggers/educators can sometimes be not the best fit for IC roles but doing open source seems like a huge advantage.

I was part of the selection committee for a position once, where we selected the more junior engineer.

The probably most simple explaination would be that for some roles you like to have someone that can be easier "shaped" into a certain role. Someone who is already successful may bring their own system of doing things. This is great if it is a good fit, but can produce frictions if it isn't.

The next thing is that if you apply to a mediocre position with overly amazing credentials, it can raise suspicions. Something must be wrong with you, maybe you got amazing credentials, but you are complicated to work with. Maybe you're looking for the mediocre job just because you think it will be a walk in the park, etc. There are legit reasons for this (e.g. "my partner moved to $TOWN for her career and I am looking for something to do here, and you seem like the best fit. I know I am technically overqualified, but I wanted to go back to coding for years now and this offers me a geeat chance to give it a go").

Of all the senior canidates we have rejected the most common issue was that they didn't offer a convincing explanation to why they chose that specific position. The worst one was talking about how it would be a relaxing position for them.

Re: I gave the AI arms and legs then it rejected me

#99

Post by mijoharas »

rpunkfu wrote: post #69

I don't mean to downplay the author's skills, but I don't see how creating an input simulation library fast-tracks someone for consideration in an AI-related engineering role.

Didn't he say it was for the team integrating his input library into claude desktop? Seems pretty relevant experience.

Re: I gave the AI arms and legs then it rejected me

#100

Post by ubutler »

siva7 wrote: post #47

There is some dirty secret i learned in my time as a eng. manager: Working in open source / Being the maintainer of a popular library / Blogging about software: All this things won't give you necessarily a competitive edge but can work against you. It's counterintuitive but sometimes teams are looking for a more low-profile hire.

In my experience, maintaining a very popular software library, supporting open source, and blogging have absolutely all contributed to my success, and, additionally, as someone who is now a founder seeking like-minded, highly skilled engineers, those are key signals for an attractive hire.

I can understand though, perhaps in a work environment where management is unlikely to be able to retain high skilled talent, you may want 'low-profile' workers that aren't going to have as many competitors chasing after them...

Post reply on HN