fullofideas

Honest question. Were these super specialized roles with such specific skill requirements that it took such a long time to find the right person? Looking back, do you think the team would have been better off hiring someone who came close enough, and supporting them to learn on the job?

While I agree with the sentiment, it is not true that only EU takes a “nationalistic” stance and safeguards its interests. US is famously doing it with tariffs..to bring back manufacturing, and I also remember hearing “America first”.

Doesn’t make what EU is doing right, just that everyone is stifling outside competition in some form.

>Combine it with China's nuclear base and labor pool. And the cherry on top, America will train 600k Chinese students as Trump agreed to.

I dont understand this part. What has nuclear base got to do with chip manufacturing? And surely, not all 600k students are learning chip design or stealing plans

Agree. Any reasonable team should have code reviews in place, but an irresponsible coder would push the responsibility of code quality and correctness to code reviewers. They were doing it earlier too, but the scale and scope was much smaller.

> The truth is that irresponsibles developers will produce irresponsible code, with or without LLMs True. But the difference is the scale and ease of doing with code generators. With a few clicks you can add hundreds of lines of code which supposedly does the right thing. While in the past, you would get code snippets for a particular aspect of the problem that you are trying to solve. You still had to figure out how to add it to your code base and somehow make it “work”

Closely followed by “This should be an easy lift”

This is pushing the burden of proof on the society. Basically, asking everyone else to pitch in and improve sources so that ai companies can reference these trust worthy sources.

This. There is a huge opportunity cost, even more so for the “best and brightest” (by whatever definition). The odds of striking it rich are really not in your favor. You may be better off working at big tech for a few years, save up, let the money work for you while you explore your entrepreneurial urge. You have a cushion and maybe that will let you take on bigger and bolder bets than what you could when you come out of college, and you maybe forced to take a “relatively safer” bet because you also have to make money soonish

Not sure about the timespan that you are referring to. Post covid hiring high, in the last 2 years or so, the hiring bar has been extremely high, in general. Not denying your experiences, may be it is even higher for you.

Personally, my experience has been that pre-covid, majority of interviewers were assessing your problem solving ability and if you can code the algorithm that you came up with. Getting the most optimal solution and fixing all edge cases for all problems in all interviews was not strictly necessary. But these days, even if you have the best solution coded up for 3 problems and missed one edge case in the 4th problem, you are not “good enough”. At one place, I was dinged for not thinking of the edge case before I wrote the program, even though I caught it while coding it up, in spite of having the write solution for the other 3 problems asked in the 2 coding rounds. It is a tough market, and probably tougher for you. Good luck mate.

I believe GDPR explicitly prevents such behavior.

Fair enough that you did not say all Indians. But, your statement was broad enough to say nepotism is widespread among Indians in tech. And the article you linked was about fraud which doesn’t imply widespread nepotism in tech. I am not asking for articles for all instances but something that is more relevant to the point that you are making.

The linked article is about a fraud conducted by a few bad apples. I can see people colluding with others that are similar to them for criminal activities - gangs, drug smuggling, and probably other frauds too. I am not sure how you inferred caste based nepotism among *all* indians in tech from that article.

I am not discounting what you said about wealth concentration and upward mobility, but the top post that started this thread is surely a counter example for what you are saying? Yes, the makers of openai/gemini/whatever could power such ai tutors, and make more money, but there are legit cases where this will be an enormous boost that was unthinkable just a few years ago.

Like I say to my toddler, there is no need for rudeness to make a point.

Nowhere did the poster say that is “sufficient” reason to ban ai. They were clarifying how software is different from humans and only that. You need to go up a couple of comments and combine this explanation with the other part of copyright infringement concerns to see why the “whole” thing is concerning for the news industry.