Honestly reputation isn't the main concern if you're in leadership there, although it is absolutely a concern. The main concern is having to do another consent decree with either the EU or the US government. Those are a complete pain in the ass.
This absolutely happens, there's a set of teams whose job it is to make sure it happens every time a system is going to be handling customer data. It's not left to the engineers to remember to do so.
So when you say "try", it's not like he was leetcoding on the side or anything. The way roles work at this level is a combination of network, exec recruiters, and eventually you talk comp. I hate to stereotype, but I'm going to assume in this case that there is someone senior at Meta that he is strongly connected to who referred him in. And by "referred him in" I don't mean submitted his name to some recruiter, I mean informing him the role even existed and making sure he was on the short list of consideration. Often this person is even the hiring manager, these are not roles you just let the recruiting pipeline fill with any person who fits the screening profile.
I’m interested in the long DisplayPort and USB cables. I’d love to get my very loud gaming PC away from my quiet office and these would be just the trick. Thanks for making me aware that this is an option! Now I have to decide where I would want the holes in my walls. Any gotchas or are these really able to be treated as super long cables that still work?
I mean yes, but also no. Companies the size of Google still have an overall strategy, and when one group’s strategy is to shit all over another part of the company, that usually doesn’t work out. Even worse, the scale Flutter is developed at is simply completely different than Android and Chrome. Flutter is really a symptom of just how strange Google is, as kind of a weird, anarcho-engineering collective where you can do anything as long as you can get a VP to support it.
The internal divisions with this are really amusing. The big driver towards Flutter seems to be needing an iOS app, but Google really underinvests in those (YT being the exception, but it might as well be a different company).
Definitely not. Get a cheap CGM subscription if this is something you want to monitor and you need any sort of real data. They’re easy to apply, update quickly (within 15 minutes of a Hcg spike you will see it in the data) and you can derive A1C from it. Actual insulin resistance itself still requires a fasted blood draw at minimum and is not really recommended (too many methods with different ways of measuring each of which is clinically significant but needs interpretation — or you can do a 3-4 hour research lab test but the value is pretty limited).
Any time you see “trends” in a press release you should be very suspicious. It’s a sign that they can’t pass regulatory scrutiny and are trying to apply the research anyway. Your scale cannot measure fat percentage, your Samsung watch cannot measure blood pressure and your Garmin cannot measure VO2Max. These are all things they’d like to be able to do (and “trends” can have some value if they’re used correctly) but they are not the thing itself.
Noninvasive blood glucose measurement has been a holy grail for wearables for over 10 years. People have thought they were going to crack it but the research just hasn’t panned out. You’re much better off getting a cheap CGM subscription, especially now that they’re available OTC most places.
You can't "both-sides" atrocities of the sort the Assad regime practiced, which are well-documented. Even if you want to grant an individual associated with Assad the benefit of the doubt, this is the the point of a trial, in international court, the same sorts of trials that were given to Hitler's associates post WW2.
The typical inhabitant of a town that is a good candidate for data center construction is suspicious of authority, hates big tech companies, has heard AI is coming for their job, and consequently not a supporter of data centers, regardless of how they're powered.
You've just described what the AI industry refers to as "evals", a collection of which forms a particular benchmark. I definitely encourage you to define your own evals, because the public benchmarks are often either saturated (largely solved and only going to see small improvements going forward) or seemingly not predictive of real world performance. I could also go further and speculate that they are in the training data, although credible benchmarks avoid this, I'm just not sure how successful they are.
I mean, they gave money to a PAC that is trying to get legislation to control all models. He’s fine with legislation affecting Anthropic as far as I can tell, as long as it’s evenly applied. Open weight models built outside the US are going to be pretty hard to control, though.
While I don’t love Google (it’s hard to love) I actually think Sundar isn’t an asshole fwiw. Also I’m not sure if you’d put Dario in big tech circles but he seems half decent. A little too AGI pilled perhaps but definitely standing up for what he believes in.
The bar is pretty low among that population, though.
The study uses Gemini data to draw conclusions about AI usage for economically useful work. Hopefully it is obvious that this is a fatally flawed approach due to inherent bias in limiting your data collection to one model which is uneven in its capabilities (as all models are) and therefore biased in what work people use it for. I might as well write a paper about the economic uses of power tools by analyzing how drill presses are used.
You really aren’t going to get very far intellectually with a rigid ideology that equates disagreeing with Trump to a mental illness. I’ll happily admit that Trump is right about some things, whether or not you’ll admit that he is wrong about some others.
The story right now is to own the least you possibly can, at least if you're a business. If I can buy it that's usually the right choice, in terms of opportunity cost if nothing else.
I feel like this might be solving a real problem (agents having identity, access controls, etc that are provisioned like you would a regular user) — with this Nostr layer that doesn’t really provide any specific value that I can see. So actions are signed, great — this is like telling me I’m going to be using blockchain to store my files because I need crypto on top of my crypto. We see where that ended up. Is Nostr doing anything here that is actually a value add, vs a processing tax that could be done more efficiently with a shared service?
It’s fun to see projects like this that seem largely unlocked by LLM assistance, and probably wouldn’t even get started if it weren’t for them. I know the hype cycle for LLMs seems to have hit its peak already, but I am fully convinced we are still in the early days of what we’ll be doing with them in software development. The only problem I see with projects like this is that there could be so many of them. Personally I’ve built at least 5 things that I had thought would be fun, but realistically I just didn’t have the time. Now I do, and if they only scratch my personal itches, that’s okay.
> The agent is more focused on coding than cowork / work
I suspect this difference is pretty minimal. Before Cowork launched I was using Claude Code in the way that I use Cowork now and getting pretty much the same results albeit without the sandboxing (which is more of a hassle than not, TBH). OpenAI says in their announcement that the same is true for Codex, which doesn't surprise me at all.
These agentic loops are pretty applicable to all kinds of tasks, not just coding, and people started realizing this pretty quickly upon their introduction / creation.
I’m a VP Eng — the backend team I manage strongly prefers CC and Opus. The Android team I manage strongly prefers Codex and GPT 5. I’m personally not sure that the answer doesn’t just come down to stylistic differences in prompting and ergonomics in the harness. The folks that prefer Codex seem to get better one-shot results, whereas those that prefer CC are doing more iterative prompting. At any rate, I don’t think you should write OpenAI off when it comes to coding.
The body both absorbs RF, meaning there has to be a safe absorption rate (SAR) and creates impedance with it. It also creates radio shadows. What’s more, larger individuals have more of this effect. At Fitbit there was a guy who I’ll refer to only by his first name — Tim — who was our first port of call for whether or not our prototypes were getting the job done, RF-wise. He was a very large human. (proportionally speaking — he was also very fit!)