> I'm not buying that people here are "fine" with this. This is one of those things people might be fine with, until they find themselves in that exact spot.
I'm gonna suggest that people who are blase about this issue are comfortable in the knowledge that it will never affect them. HN contributors might have 99+ problems, but being lusted over by the internet at large isn't one of them.
It can be interpreted both ways: "I cannot recommend X too highly (because they suck)" vs "I cannot recommend X too highly (because whatever praise I give will be inadequate)"
1. Audit / evaluation / quality assurance teams exist across multiple verticals from multinationals to government, and cannot reliably function when overly subservient to the production or “value creating” side
2. Boeing is a good and timely example of the consequences of said internal checks and balances collapsing under “value creation” pressure. That was a catastrophic failure which still can’t reasonably be compared to the downside of misaligned AI.
I agree with you on both points, but they have QA which is 1. The long-term risk team was more of a research/futurology/navel-gazing entity rather than a qa/audit function. I would say if you have any possible safety/alignment test that you can feasibly run it should be part of the CI/CD pipline and be run during training also. That's not what that group was doing.
>managers should get paid more than senior devs. Why?
Bureaucracy rules.
If almost nobody is going to be getting anywhere anyway, why not?
In a very high technology field, regardless of whether it has anything to do with computers or not, sometimes what is needed is a team of individual high-performers.
Where each member could have the same high degree of expertise in the same relevant area, or at the other end of the spectrum, unique expertise in the variety of complementary domains the project requires.
Fundamentally any one of these productive individuals could do an outstanding job (of some kind) on their own, since that's the entrance criterion.
It's not supposed to go downhill just because you have a project that needs more engineers than one.
Any one of these operators who are not already a "rock star" is just because they do not have a manager promoting them & their talents properly.
The bandleader's got to be in the band with enough talent to be respected by all the band members, and performing right there beside them when it counts most. Especially if they're all rock stars, somebody has to herd cats.
The manager needs open-ended compensation with no upside limitation, other than it can not exceed the income of a single band member, completely dependent on how well the manager promotes those under his wing and how lucrative the gigs are he gets for the band.
Otherwise no rock stars for you.
You know, how somebody really can be 10X at any time, but only if the situation is right in many ways beyond that one individual?
A good manager can bring more than that multiple to the bottom line if they concentrate on promoting & increasing the actual performers' earnings first, rather than themselves.
Egypt currently definitely is, other than in very individual cases.
From Google:
=================
Egypt, however, has warned against an influx of refugees. It facilitates humanitarian aid into Gaza, but has said a mass exodus of Palestinians out of Gaza into Egypt is a red line, saying it fears Israel might never let the Palestinians go back.
=====================
And Egypts real fear is that the Palestinians in Egypt will try to take back Palestine. Which wouldn't be very good for Egypt and engage them in a war with Israel.
But, without me being a legal expert in any way, shape or form, my feeling is it is relatively similar to the "Fjordteam" case from Sandefjord a few years ago:
Different owners, different jobs, but operated by volunteers who looked for a nore efficient (and healthier :-) way to finance their activities instead of the traditional Norwegian "cake raffle" ("kakelotteri")
The case involving a large and well known religious organisation that “employed” an army of unpaid volunteers? Can’t see how that relates to the broad description you provided earlier.
First of all, this unironically reminds me of Borat.
More importantly, you keep citing legality in this thread as if that should basically end the discussion. Quite frankly that strikes me as a position of convenience, because clearly HN is not a court of law and the scope is not restricted to whatever happens to be legal in any given jurisdiction.
Do you for instance support all legal acts in your country? Going out on a limb I suspect you find at least a few morally dubious or worse.
Just some examples off the top of my head : IVF for single women? State support for all mosques? Fosen windfarms and a broad co-signing of feel-good UN resolutions? Preferential hiring based on either gender or ethnicity? Slap on the wrist punishments for basically all offenses? Enshrined trans rights? Teachers being at the total (legal) mercy of abusive students?
I dunno man, almost like “it’s legal!” is not the QED you think it is.
