Shareholder, not shareholders.

The shares have different voting rights, and Zuck has majority control that way.

I prefer to focus my activism toward the companies of the shares I don't hold

this is why the world never gets better

I suppose it is somewhat subjective but it seems to be the world has always been getting better when you zoom out a bit

This is what I expect. Theyre Not hiring even engineers. By the time they have a strategy, plan, hire, and act on that plan they will be behind the curve, and force to use the $ to acquire someone who did.

Well this is blatantly false, she linked the career page and I know of people that received offers recently.

They have very strong talent from Meta's FAIR/Pytorch teams as well as a lot of strong people from OAI.

While you are seeing in to the future, can you tell me the Powerball numbers?

the product is announced and their hires are public

Or this isn't real and is just a scare tactic

Source on the 100+ drone pilots an cell carriers? I've been hoping to find an article on how they staged the pilots for manual guidance. I imagined they would have had to tunnelled all that traffic to each operator from the truck, but the cell towers is clever

DARPA might be an exception to that rule. I've always been inspired by dARPA

We need a cross-cutting examination of how bad 'economics' is as a science, outside of a narrow defined set of measurable parameters

Economics is a great way of looking at the world as long as you acknowledge its limitations. I think you're conflating an economist with economics. Economists are human with all that entails.

https://aeon.co/essays/how-economists-rode-maths-to-become-o... (4 April 2016)

Absolutely terrible.

The foundations of economics are built on school boy style maths errors.

They have famous "paradoxes" and results that are just bad maths.

It's a ridiculous joke of a research field.

If you’re going to dismiss an entire field, you could at least point to specifics that are widely held tenants.

A rational actor has never, does not now, and will never exist.

Despite what social media stoics say.

There needs to be some careful human-in-the-loop analysis in general, and a feedback loop for false positives.

Could you expand on the "Not too rigorous cost accounting"

Not OP, but my take:

Goodheart’s law states: “ When a measure becomes a target, it ceases to be a good measure”

If your accounting is too fine grained, there becomes an inescapable draw to point at a metric and declare that a goal.

Once that happens, engineering tasks can be come extremely well defined to the point of acting like tunnel vision.

Instead of finding improvements or innovations generally, the focus is entirely on moving a specific metric.

You see this issue in highly metric driven orgs as well.

noobermin is rihgt. I've been reading a book about gastroenterology and it is surprising how many decades occur between research, findings, medical acceptance, and then eventually application to the public.

What book? Sounds interesting.