Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | jimbokun's comments login

So you don't have to spend a lot of time cleaning up their messes.

In a large corporation, I don't think it's possible.

In a small company, can look at revenues and profits, and maybe breakdown by product line, and then create a bonus pool according to how well the company did and let managers decide how to divvy it up based on their evaluation of their reports.

At a very large corporation, how can you trace back credit for overall corporate performance to individuals? If individual contributors own stock in the company or RSUs, how do they know whether their actions are increasing the corporation's value?


I don't think your individual performance as an IC should be measured in anything related to revenue under normal circumstances. As an IC engineer you aren't in control of product. You can give feedback on product decisions but that gets rarely heard. You mostly have control over deliverables that you are asked to produce and that's what you should be measured by. Empowering others around you is another factor that must be incorporated and arguably this is where things get fuzzy but a good manager should be able to tell. Of course it also matters that the company trusts the manager otherwise you end to in gaming metrics land. If your manager cannot be trusted you are off into shitb politics land. Those are the two major failure modes. Shit metric gaming and shit politics. Preventing those two from happening is hard and must come from the top

Season tickets would likely motivate a lot of supporters with the right background to apply despite the low salary. But they only offer “preferred access” to tickets and I’m not even sure what that means.

If there would be opportunities to present to Mikel Arteta and other high level football personnel, that would also be very motivating beyond raw salary.


Looks on pace to eliminate every human job over 10 years.

What is the hard limiting factor constraining software and robots from replacing any human job in that time span? Lots of limitations of current technology, but all seem likely to be solved within that timeframe.


What data to you have to support such a claim?

From Zuckerberg, for example:

>> "a lot of the code in our apps and including the AI that we generate, is actually going to be built by AI engineers instead of people engineers."

https://www.entrepreneur.com/business-news/meta-developing-a...

Ikea's been doing this for a while:

>> Ingka says it has trained 8,500 call centre workers as interior design advisers since 2021, while Billie - launched the same year with a name inspired by IKEA's Billy bookcase range - has handled 47% of customers' queries to call centres over the past two years.

https://www.reuters.com/technology/ikea-bets-remote-interior...


By your own admission, Ikea eliminated 0 jobs and you gave no number for Meta.

Do you expect all companies to retrain? Do you expect CEOs to be wrong? Do you expect AI to stay the same, get better, or get worse? I never made the claim that new jobs will NOT be made, that is yet to be seen, but jobs will be lost to AI.

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/may/18/bt-cut-jobs...

>> “For a company like BT there is a huge opportunity to use AI to be more efficient,” he said. “There is a sort of 10,000 reduction from that sort of automated digitisation, we will be a huge beneficiary of AI. I believe generative AI is a huge leap forward; yes, we have to be careful, but it is a massive change.”

Goldman Sacs:

https://www.gspublishing.com/content/research/en/reports/202...

>> Extrapolating our estimates globally suggests that generative AI could expose the equivalent of 300mn full-time jobs to automation.


I'm on your side, but there's two readings of these reports:

1) "We are serious, this is going to happen."

2) "AI is big right now so if we hype it we might get some money!"


I do not have any hard data from 10 years from now.

My speculation is based on not seeing any constraints that will block progress of machine intelligence from reaching those capabilities within 10 years.

Also, Kurzweil's predictions from early 2000s have been eerily prescience and this is the time frame he predicted for the Singularity.


If you are asking that question seriously check out the recent Rogan podcast with Wesley Huff. Has the usual Rogan conspiracy theory pontificating, but also some good discussion about the history of how we got the Bible we have today.

First off, the claim that the original text was first written 100s of years after the words were spoken is completely false and isn’t taken seriously by anyone in the field.


Well then your difference with Christianity is only one of degree.

I don't understand how you came to this conclusion. Some of my differences with Christianity are that I believe that morals should come from thought, reasoning, and empathy, not from hierarchy. That I don't think there's an outside supernatural force that's perfect in every way, but also explicitly flawed, that's characterized by infinite love, forgiveness, and benevolence but is less loving and forgiving of "sinners" than I am, and that sets people up to fail that they might suffer forever after.

Accepting that there are things it is useful to believe that are not necessarily literally true actually separates me further from Christianity, since they insist that all their beliefs are literally true, and that doubting such is grounds for eternal torture.


Most atheists and agnostics struggle greatly to replace the meaning and moral guidance provided by religion.

First and foremost the community aspect. There are countless benefits to being part of an active faith community that atheists have had a very hard time replicating.


Uh… no?

I replicate my community where I find it. Some of it is at a brunch spot I go to regularly. Some of it is a bar that I frequent. Some of it is in annual activities with my neighbors.

I don’t need to believe in a made up Sky Daddy to be a good person, I have plenty of examples in my communities.


As far as I know it remains an unsolved problem.

Did you read the article?

The main example he gives is a simple factual matter about the words a specific early Christian manuscript. The LLM invented new text that’s not at all what’s in the manuscript.

He also convincingly argues people performing poor apologetics is no excuse to deploy an LLM performing poor apologetics.


In your experience, what has improved productivity?

Weekly standup to check in with devs, leave them alone otherwise. Reach out if a high priority item comes up, but 9 times out of 10 that can be an email.

I've heard that one of the benefits of agile is identifying blockers and encouraging collaboration, but I saw much better results from assuming you've hired intelligent adults with work ethic and letting them reach out and collaborate as needed. Daily standups, sprints, boards, planning, etc. are great in a low-trust environment where you can't be sure people are doing the right things. But if you've hired self-directed people, that stuff just gets in the way.


There's a balance. Not every team is made up of infallible devs, even at decent companies. Human nature is never full-trust.

I've known talented devs who are great people who still need more oversight than you describe. Usually they are ~5 years off from being full-trust, yet still valuable team members. Yes they benefit from daily standups.


I'd argue they'd probably benefit more from 1-1 mentorship, and as a bonus you don't have to force your entire team to adopt agile.

Consider applying for YC's Spring batch! Applications are open till Feb 11.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: