Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | jjfoooo4's commentslogin

Why do you think that? Senior, staff, principle levels are pretty standard across the industry, even if some companies call them different things

This is definitely not true. It’s all dependent on the company size.

I work in cloud consulting (specialize in app dev).

I worked at AWS ProServe (full blue badge RSU earning employee) before working for a much smaller company. I’ve seen the leveling guidelines for both.

An L5 (mid level) at AWS had to be a subject matter expert in at least one area (development, DevOps, security, etc) and be able to lead a “workstream” of a larger project including dealing with a customer or a smaller project by themselves. That maps to a “Senior Architect” at my current company.

A senior (L6) at AWS should be able to handle larger projects with multiple workstreams and deal with more ambiguity. That maps to a staff at my current company (current position)

An L7 is usually over a practice and/or handling multiple large implementations and more involved with strategy. Imagine someone (who hypothetically - they don’t need outside consultants) was working with Netflix.

That maps to a “Senior Staff” at our company.

You might ask what about lower levels in consulting? I never work with them. The bilingual cloud architects/senior cloud architects work with them. We don’t hire anything lower than that in the US.


I'm guessing you've only worked at very large companies, specifically tech companies then?

I've worked at pretty much every size company imaginable.As the top post pointed out, these titles are meaningless across smaller companies. I've been at startups where nobody had titles at all, I've small companies where anyone remotely senior as a principal. I've also worked at large non-tech companies with only 3 levels for IC, after that you were expected to transition to management.

Large, tech companies have some degree they can be compared but what these titles mean from company to company is pretty meaningless.


They're somewhat standardized in Big Tech in that people have worked out how to map titles across these companies. But that accounts for a very small fraction of the total industry.

The upgrade to the native installer gave me some issues, I had Claude fail to return any responses and continuously eat memory until my computer crashed! The only fix I could figure out is nuking my entire .claude dir, losing all my history etc with it

What else does "regime change" as a goal refer to?

This scenario always imagines that the people getting bombs rained down on them will somehow determine that their actual friends in the world are those dropping the bombs.

Even accepting this, how exactly are these peaceful, western friendly civilians going to withstand a war better than their country's army?

It's very depressing to see this playbook credulously trotted out yet again. When has this worked?


> But the entire economic surplus of Europe, Asia and North America was basically dedicated to (or extracted towards) making things that were reasonably expected to be destroyed within the year.

This is no longer necessary to inflict the catastrophic destruction we're really referring to when talking about a hypothetical WWIII


Their argument is that, by definition, it can’t be a world war unless all economic surplus is dedicated to war purposes.

I tend to agree with both of you, and that by extension, we will never see another world war unless society as we know it collapses significantly.


I don't think you are using standard definitions.

> A world war is an international conflict that involves most or all of the world's major powers. > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_war

> Total war is a type of warfare that mobilizes the totality of national resources to sustain war production, blurring the line between military and civilian activities and legitimate attacks on civilian targets as part of a war without restriction as to the combatants, territory or objectives involved. > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Total_war

It does so happen that the two world wars were also total wars.


Well first off I think we were speaking colloquially. But secondly, I think unless certain powers cross some threshold where they’re undeniably engaging “total war”, they’ll use wishy-washy terms like “special military operation” (Russia) or “armed conflict”. That’s also not to mention proxy wars (Syria) or even non-violent acts of aggression against sovereignty (Hong Kong).

In other words, “total war” is a necessary ingredient for a “world war” these days or you’ll have all of these countries claiming they’re not actually at war.


Things have changed since I was a kid. We've gone from saturation bombing and dropping nukes as the big kahuna to being able to do point assassination strikes.

Topical the Israelis just killed Khamenei.


> The unix commandline tools being the most efficient way to use an LLM has been a surprise. > I wonder the reason.

Because they are really, really well designed for humans.

Everyone is trying to reinvent the wheel and create "agent interfaces", but there is fundamentally no difference between what makes a text based interface easy for a human to use and what makes it easy for an agent to use.


Tech has been trying to "gobble up" legal, medical, etc for decades. I'm quite skeptical a newcomer with a powerful model will be able to penetrate them, especially while selling those incumbents access to the same models they are building on.

> Tech has been trying to "gobble up" legal, medical, etc for decades

This time it’s different, obviously.

> especially while selling those incumbents access to the same models they are building on.

In the extreme, i think it’s plausible that frontier labs basically stop selling any access to their leading models. Whatever you make available by API will just get distilled. In the vertical integration world, the only way you get access to these models is by contracting with a company to buy a product (requirements in, code/decisions out) rather than direct conversation with the AI.

I don’t think they would unship Opus 4.6, but there isn’t a strong incentive to compete on chatbot intelligence in this world.


Why would we assume the remote providers are going to be cheaper? They are burning cash, and Claude is already jacking up prices.

"Local" is the means to an end, not the value prop itself. The value prop is "fast, private, and free", which I think is going to be very compelling.


My main takeaway from this episode is that anonymity on the web is getting harder to support. There are some forums that people want to go to to talk to humans, and as AI agents get increasingly good at operating like humans, we're going to see some products turn to identity verification as a fix.

Not an outcome I'm eager to see!


One could build up a reputation with a completely anonymous PGP key. That was somewhat the point of USENET ca. 1998.


I think we could do something like that again. Need a reputation to follow you around. Humans need to know who they are dealing with.


I want that to be how things work, although recent history has not been favorable when it comes to Public Key Infrastructure as applied to individuals. Inconvenience, foot-guns, required technical expertise levels, the pain of revocation lists...


In a sense, it seems Accellerando got a lot more right than not ( reputation markets in this particular case ). We may be arguing over the best way to do it, but it seems that the conclusion was already drawn.


How is it that no one is noticing that it's the lobsters who escaped!

How prescient is that?

* http://www.accelerando.org/fiction/accelerando/accelerando.h...


To be fair, it was something of a marketing master stroke to adopt claw as a symbol. Admittedly, it does make me uneasy the same way Kamala's writers dressed her up in Lisa Simpson's clothes ( episode when she is a president ), but... you have a point. We are a weird mix of pop culture memes becoming so intertwined it is hard to separate them at times.


Ugh.

If this isn’t part of Crustafarianism, it should be.


Agreed!

So I actually poked Steinberg and Stross.

Sadly Steinberg hasn't read it, and Stross denies LLMs are a thing.


Someone here recommended Accelerando about a month ago - I’m sitting in an airport now reading it. It’s… deep. Probably one of the two deepest sci-fi novels I’ve ever read, beat only by Blindsight.

I’m not finished yet though, so that order could change :)


I read it after Prime Intellect during my AI binge. I think the initial feeling I got from it was the same as I did during first read of Snow Crash. Familiar world, and yet everything is very, very different so you feel more like an explorer than anything else.


If you can generate a song with a two sentence prompt, so can anyone else. Music and art is only interesting when there’s originality or a point of view being expressed.

I really think art (as in art that’s made for it’s own sake, as opposed to jazzing up a PowerPoint slide or whatever) is by definition something AI will not make inroads in


I feel like you’ve never ran into pop culture before. It was algorithmic before AI.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: