sk11001

Pretty cool. Stuff like this doesn't happen enough at non-tech companies.

That’s how interviews go though, it’s not like I’ve ever had to use Bayes rule at work but for a few years everyone loved asking about it in screening rounds.

It's a great summary for ML interview prep.

The HN title moderation ruins posts more often than it helps with anything.

I have never seen a single one of his movies but I love watching interviews with him, he had an amazing presence and so much energy.

you can be rejected despite getting 100%

But can you be accepted without it?

He never had it. If this was 10 years ago, you'd be forgiven for not seeing through it but by this point there's really no excuse.

You’re thinking “any data”, he’s thinking “useful data for training an LLM”.

I think so, it was bad enough for me to cancel my subscription.

Good luck finding a country that doesn’t seem in decline, or improving from horrible to slightly less horrible but still worse than the EU.

The mention of quantum computing in your question seems completely random. Do you think something will happen in quantum computing which will make people with only an accounting education unemployable for the jobs you want to work at but which will not apply to people with an accounting education and a STEM masters?

It’s a very bad use case for an LLM because they don’t have as much polars code in their training data and the polars API has changed a lot in the past couple of years.

Copilot is still suggesting out of date polars code to me. ChatGPT and Claude regularly suggest operations that are valid in pandas and not in polars.

Getting a new job - changing priorities, difficult market, losing motivation to keep searching.

Did well on health goals though.

Because comparing these models is way too difficult for a single person to do objectively with just their own brain. So opinions vary. And Claude 3.5 still does pretty dumb things when it comes to coding.

And OpenAI still have better marketing, market share and much more public attention on their products than Anthropic.

People in the part of the org that's cut. In my experience most layoffs aren't about cutting x% across teams, they're about the company deciding that they don't need entire functions altogether and getting rid of entire teams.

The bar for things happening in the world isn't "do we really need this", it never has been. It's more like "does anyone have any incentive to do this", and with AI plenty of companies and people do.

The logic is flimsy - having the newer equipment also means looking for reasons to use it to justify the cost so these dentists will often recommend expensive onlays instead of fillings for example.

Similar experience, not with the office but with the dentist himself - he came across as way too artificially nice, more like a salesman than a dentist, then recommended 4 treatments, 2 of which were unnecessary according to the second opinion I got.

There's attempts but you can only do so much in hundreds/thousands of dimensions. Most of the time the visualization doesn't really provide anything meaningful.

That's a low bar, inserting keywords in white font to trick CV scanners has been a thing for a long time, this is just the next step.

Steve Jobs was right - Dropbox is a feature, not a product.

I don't agree that it's idealistic because it's only directional - it tells you what to move towards, it doesn't give you any idealistic target or criteria for any of the things it lists. Which seems like a good thing.

Go is lovely - it’s super pragmatic and things just work.

If it is, so is most other knowledge work. In which case society is so screwed in the short-to-medium term that there’s no point in worrying about it since you can’t do anything to prevent or avoid it.

It’s like worrying about nuclear war - low probability of a negative outcome completely out of your control.

It's cool that you can build this but in practical terms it's solving a problem that nobody has.

Earning a living through creativity doesn't work for the majority of people anyway even without AI in the picture. Creative expression is a thing that exists for its own sake, the people who make a living out of it are lucky outliers.

There's no pivot.

Let's put working on a different level of abstraction aside (like reviewing outputs and guiding AI) - it's already happening to some extent and developer jobs are always changing with or without AI.

If AI gets good enough to largely remove the need for software development jobs, I don't think there's a pivot, at least not at scale.

1. If AI gets good enough at SWE, it will very likely also be extremely good at any kind of knowledge work, so you can't go and be an accountant or a lawyer because they are losing their jobs at scale too.

2. An individual can go and be a plumber or an electrician but it can't be done at scale. If 40% of workers are doing knowledge work, they can't all switch to manual labor, there isn't enough demand in those fields to absorb 40% of people. (This is even if we ignore other problems like the fact that not everyone has the aptitude or ability to retrain)

3. Even if you individually are okay because you're still employed, or because you're independently wealthy, you still have a huge problem - at 30%+ levels of unemployment the economy and society as a whole begin to collapse. If you have a job, there wouldn't be enough people to pay for your services; if you have assets (stocks, property, currency) their value won't be preserved in an unstable society with high unemployment. It wouldn't be just a problem for the people who are directly affected, it would be everyone's problem.

So nothing specific about OpenAI.

Are many people leaving? Or is it a couple of very visible people?

Do we know that this has happened or are you just guessing?