Ttereal tellers is ttattElonkows nothing about AI. Anyone involved in the field knows all of the big names because we read their papers, listen to their lectures, and talk about their models. He then goes on to be dismissive of work he’s not even close to understanding. It’s blatant ignorance, and Elon is used to just being able to power through his ignorance by either BSing his way past people who know no more than him or firing anyone who is actually qualified and as a result disagrees with him.

Not all states support recalls. California kind of goes all in on the democracy thing with the ease of introducing ballot initiatives and recalls and such. It’s mostly fine, but it can also result in pretty stupid plays like this.

Yeah, this was an easy one to call. It’s repeated in other countries as well.

One other factor that they don’t mention is that the surge in street opioids corresponded to a crackdown on doctors writing opioid prescriptions. I saw this coming when I was doing policy analysis and looking at unintended consequences in complex systems. I don’t remember much about what degree of a surge we saw in prescriptions, but I do remember all of those “pill mill” headlines. That always struck me as a pretty manufactured crisis - but even if not, the crackdown certainly didn’t improve the situation.

This is entirely subjective - I haven’t gone around counting things up - but I’ve noticed both more pro-Tesla and pro-SpaceX posts and increased arguments on the anti-Musk posts. It seemed (on lemmy) to be coming from the same small number of accounts, so it could just be an enthusiastic handful of fanboys.

If one of them became a mod, that might explain it. They were very active in the Tesla and SpaceX subs with multiple articles posted within minutes of each other within the past couple of days.

I’m a manager at a FAANG and have been involved in tech and scientific research for commercial, governmental, and military applications for about 35 years now, and have been through a lot of different careers in the course of things.

First - and I really don’t want to come off like a dick here - you’re two years in. Some people take off, and others stay at the same level for a decade or more. I am the absolute last person to argue that we live in a meritocracy - it’s a combination of the luck of landing with the right group on the right projects - but there’s also something to be said about tenacity in making yourself heard or moving on. You can’t know a whole lot with two years of experience. When I hire someone, I expect to hold their hand for six months and gradually turn more responsibility over as they develop both their technical and personal/project skills.

That said, if you really hate it, it’s probably time to move on. If you’re looking to move into a PM style role, make sure that you have an idea of what that all involves, and make sure you know the career path - even if the current offer pays more, PMs in my experience cap out at a lower level for compensation than engineers. Getting a $10k bump might seem like you’re moving up, but a) it doesn’t sound like you’re comparing it to other engineering offers and b) we’re in a down market and I’d be hesitant to advise anyone to make a jump right now if their current position is secure. Historically speaking, I’m expecting demand to start to climb back to high levels in the next 1-2 years.

Honestly, it just sounds like your job sucks. I have regularly had students, interns, and mentees in my career because that’s important to me. One thing I regularly tell people is that if there’s something that they choose to read about rather than watching Netflix on a Saturday, that’s something they should be considering doing for a living. Obviously that doesn’t cover Harry Potter, but if you’re reading about ants or neural networks or Bayesian models or software design patterns, that’s a pretty good hint as to where you should be steering. If you’d rather work on space systems, or weapons, or games, or robots, or LLMs, or whatever - you can slide over with side and hobby projects. If you’re too depressed to even do that, take the other job. I’d rather hire a person who quit their job to drive for Uber while they worked on their own AI project than someone who was a full stack engineer at a startup that went under.

Anyway, that’s my advice. Let me know if I can clarify anything.

It’s going to be a glorious disaster. Didn’t they slash the initial IPO estimate about six months after announcing it and shortly before the whole API thing? I haven’t cared enough to follow it closely, especially since abandoning the platform, but it really seems like the stakeholders wanting to cash in on a sinking ship before it finally goes down.

I always got “Groundhog Day with Guns,” plus “Waiting for Godot,” plus Game of Thrones.

Too much alliteration?

This the order in which you should try to access papers:

1. Normal Internet search including quotes to force the title and components like “pdf”
2. Organizational/lab pages of the authors. Very many people will put either full papers or preprints on their personal professional pages.
3. Preprint services like arXiv. The ones you look at will be determined by subject area. Preprints will usually only differ from the published work in formatting.
4. Just email the authors. Most of us are so happy that virtually anyone wants to read the paper we spent months on that we will happily send a copy. Because people are busy you might need to hit them up a couple of times, but most will be more than happy to send you a copy, and most publications specifically carve out to allow authors to do that.

You’re talking like a Sovereign Citizen.

I’m talking about the very specific laws that prevent people from being evicted if they’ve been residing on a property for N months without following a very deliberate and drawn out legal procedure so that landlords cannot evict a family from their home of many years because of some missed rent payments or because they want to upgrade the place so they can charge more to a new tenant. Those are the laws that keep the sheriffs from just kicking down doors, at least in some states.

I’m not taking a moral position on squatting. My friends and I squatted in an abandoned house while I was in high school, although most of us didn’t live there full time. If I noticed someone squatting tomorrow, especially in a corporate owned home, I would not have seen it. But the laws that I’m talking about were designed to protect tenants from having their lives unfairly disrupted, and I’m arguing that even if people are against squatters, we still need to protect tenants’ rights.

I would have thought that was abundantly clear.

Yes. Yes, I do.

Edit: Bought some. Will update if any other plants or ants start glowing unexpectedly.

“Speak up, speak out, get in the way. Get in good goat trouble, necessary trouble, and help redeem the soul of America.”

-John Lewis

I have no issues with raising property taxes on non-owner occupied housing, and having them even higher on unoccupied housing.

Being from California (and earlier from New York), that’s very much the intention. Both states (and municipal laws in places like LA, SF, and NYC) make the landlords have to jump through a lot of hoops before an eviction can take place, and the tenants can file for protection.

I know that things vary from state to state, but I’ve only been a renter in NY, NJ, and CA. I’ve also successfully sued a landlord for over $100k in damages and expenses.

No, they mean the same thing, at least in my familiarity with the phrases. “Cry me a river” means that I don’t care to hear about their complaints, even if their tears were enough to fill a river, because I think they’re not legitimate.

First, squatters of this type are taking advantage of laws intended to protect renters from predatory landlords. Wherever you stand on people appropriating unused property, these laws need to stay in place even if they’re made more specific.

Second, news outlets like this will always quote a “guns and drugs” case and not the mom with three kids seeking employment or homeless vet cases.

Third, with security cams and doorbells being so cheap, there’s no reason why this should be an issue, especially for a large real estate rental company. That alone puts me in “cry me a river” mode. Notice again that the article lists interviews with individual homeowners but is actually profiling the impact on a rental company.

I understand.

I hold a scientifically informed position (to the point that I can go into neuroanatomy and evolutionary dynamics - I’m a biologist) that makes me believe quite firmly that free will simply does not exist and that people cannot therefore be morally held culpable for their actions. I would require the people (that is, the prosecution) to prove to my satisfaction that the person under trial can and should be held culpable for their actions, not just that they committed the actions or that they “knew they were wrong.” This is a subject I’ve studied at length and can make numerous citations to back my position - including neurobiologists and neuropsychologists at the top research institutions around the world.

If I were to be put on a jury, I would feel obligated to make my position known to my fellow jurors and would explain at great length why a person with a hypertrophied amygdala and a hypotrophied prefrontal cortex resulting from growing up in poverty in an abusive household and in a violent neighborhood can be fully expected to react violently with a hyper developed fear reaction due to a pre-triggered limbic system with extremely diminished executive control. That person is just set up to fail.

And I would require to know that the person should be held culpable. If a man’s daughter were to have been kidnapped, and the kidnappers told him they’d kill her if he didn’t rob a bank, we’d have a situation in which the man would have done the deed, made a plan, knew it was wrong, but still would not be held culpable. I couldn’t see a prosecutor attempting to try that case, and I couldn’t see a conviction happening if they did. That’s how I have to evaluate behaviors in general.

I’m not saying that dangerous members of society shouldn’t be removed - I’m saying it needs to be approached as a medical problem and not one of crime and punishment. As long as “guilt” is a factor and punishment is the answer, I cannot sign off on that.

I would not, however, say that in front of the jury pool. I’d request a private meeting with the judge and attorneys and carefully answer their questions. I recognize that I likely would not be selected for a jury.

You have to differentiate between your responsibilities as a citizen and human versus those more specific ones as a juror. I argue my position with people, I write and work on trying to spread my understanding, but I’m not going to put myself in the position of either coming off like I was trying to deceive the court or tainting the pool illegally. If they ask “if we prove the defendant guilty will you vote to convict?” I could technically say “Yes” knowing that they will not prove the defendant guilty because that’s not a status I think exists - unless we get into a multi week philosophical and biological discussion - but it’s not really what they’re asking and I know that.

On the other hand I would be perfectly confident in clearly and openly stating that I would not send someone to prison for life or to the death penalty, because I am opposed to both of those things independently of my position on free will.

Be careful with that. You can just vote not to convict. Talking in front of the jury candidates about nullification can be seen as poisoning the jury pool and can be grounds for a contempt charge. It’s better to speak privately with the judge/court to go over your concerns about the case.

I wish we still had David Graeber around. I really appreciated his insights on this kind of dynamic.

TiVo was an early digital video recorder that dominated the market for a while. Broadcasters brought lawsuits against the company saying the recording of videos was violating copyright laws, and advertisers hated it because you could skip commercials. TiVo argued in court that they weren’t pirating, but just time shifting the content. Similar arguments were used for people who ripped rented dvds and so on.

TiVo has entered the chat.