ResearchCode

That's what they said about the coins and the tokens too.

Not out of charity, it's more about incompetence and nepotism.

Since people can't behave and come up with "business models" like this, sites will have to become subscription-only.

> standup

The one of you who came up with that idea was the true -0.5x engineer.

If you want people to show up, cancel the 70-80-90% of your meetings that are completely unnecessary.

No, I am comparing it to software development. Software development is not further away from research mathematics than it is from shipping boxes.

> If you work at "university" and "prove" 1 conjecture a year and your colleagues do 100, should you not be fired?

No, because that isn't enough context.

That's not a trade-off you have to make. There are full remote jobs with no surveillance.

Workplace surveillance needs to be regulated swiftly and strongly.

ByteFormer. All You Need. The applied papers that claim dubious "sota" status on some benchmark do this. The foundational work that is actually worth reading doesn't.

Tells you something about their salt tolerance. It makes all the difference in plumbing together CRUD applications effectively.

Is machine learning model "alignment" a serious academic concept? I've only seen this mentioned in pseudo-philosophical Twitter posts before.

If they don't mind the telemetry.

It's purely a cost issue. Even in those countries, if you're important enough you will have at least an annual check-up.

If we're afraid that AI will replace lawyers, they will replace human resources way earlier than that. Human resources are really poor quality internal lawyers that also do some data entry.

I rarely see actual "social skills" rewarded.

That's the opposite of my experience. Talkers are a dime a dozen. Tech talents are a gem and you're very lucky to get them. The few of them will do most of your work.

Extraordinary achievements are not rewarded much. A random on Wall Street makes as much or more than a Terence Tao off just an old-money surname.

I would feel sorry for him too, because it sounds like the real problem was with your testing and code review process, not your very new co-worker. Why are your reviewers accepting broken patches?

Research paper on AI doesn't necessarily mean a meme title and chasing a dubious "sota" status on some benchmark. I would say foundational work is more worth reading.

What is a "learner"?

What managers? The LLM will do their job first.

If an LLM can learn to create a picture it's likely it can also learn to create a prompt.

In my experience they don't get run over, but they can get outnumbered. If you're in a workplace with more than 10% of people that are dishonest or malicious you should look for an exit.

Those companies create worse software and not more reliably or quickly. You can't micromanage into good software.

It's based on emotion and human interaction is not a moat that seems be reassuring to artists. I wouldn't count on it unless there is a technical reason.

Did it know that before the last LLM failure was posted on Twitter or Hackernews? Trawling tech media for LLM failures can be assumed to be part of the "human feedback".

The optimal sprint length is none. It's an awful concept that is misused to micromanage highly skilled professionals that often didn't learn to say no. You want to work on three to six month projects, not two week "sprints".

What you might actually mean is that you are going to try to sell agile snake oil to someone who knows less. Try a middle manager without technical background? They tend to be more receptive.

I don't think there's much evidence if any at all that it provides more accuracy or understanding. First tier companies tend not to use "sprints" at all.

There's nothing to understand, the agile manifesto or worse the "scrum" pamphlet can be read on a lunch break. Somehow engineers who put ten-thousand hours into their craft need a layman agile helper to understand it?

Yes. Nobody asks a mathematician to "story point" the conjectures they are working on. Nobody asks them for daily status updates. This is pure and harmful micromanagement because software engineers are not saying stop it.

To be fair having demeaning names for the engineers' work activities is not the worst part of corporate agile. Unfortunately.

I have heard some third tier companies and lower play "planning poker" at work. It doesn't sound like any fun or efficient but a cheap paycheck for an "agile helper". I am not sure how many of them have remained employed during these layoffs.