Between this and Shazeer you guys are idolizing individuals in an unhealthy way IMO.
Why are we keeping tabs on researchers moving around?
You're talking about them like people talk about the NFL trading players or (football) soccer teams making recordbreaking player transfers.
someone further down wrote
> Anthropic legit builds one the strongest if not the strongest IC team in the history of computational technology.
What a weird thing to say. It's not a team sport where you support 'sides'.
>What a weird thing to say. It's not a team sport where you support 'sides'.
It is if you have equity!
Why not, really? People have different (though likely conflicting) views on the company and it’s an interesting (and potentially profitable) space to follow.
I‘d argue it’s more meaningful than sports, which makes it more interesting to follow.
Of course the sports aspects are silly, but maybe they‘re just a fun way to keep track. Happens to other popular companies in the tech sector as well.
this is a natural human trait. soap operas, sports, businesses, music.
there are also real implications. assuming money is not the only factor in moving to anthropic, it does help guide insight into where innovation might be and where to put your AI spend. a decision which could result in real returns for individuals and companies.
The team with the most star power and hype tends to attract the best young talent.
If the next big breakthrough in AI comes from Anthropic, good chance it comes from some genius you’ve never heard of who decided to work there because of [famous researcher].
It is like NFL trading players, what's wrong with that? Not that either should be idolized, but they're paid a lot for a reason.
KRAZAM made a skit about this. You would like it.
It’s annoying that the headline gives no context of who Jumper is, as if everyone is expected to know.
Google has been bleeding talent for decades, though few people have ever heard of them before they left google. Like when John Giannendra left it was the first time I'd ever heard of him but it was made out like he was a key person and big blow for Google. Every self driving car company came out of ex Google people as well, same w/OpenAi. The thing is Google research orgs have always been much bigger than any competitors, they'll be shedding people forever but there's a lot more where that came from
It's Hacker News, a lot of people probably know. I didn't, but he has a Wikipedia page so whatever.
I’d be willing to bet actual money that less than half of the people reading this site know this person by name. Regardless, good headlines usually include context and this post has none.
why is it unhealthy?