I hold a R&D Position at an MIT lab. I also hold gov clearances for DoD work. They are pretty accepting of the fact that a lot of folks in the field are neurodivergent. No one cares because if you deliver results you deliver results. No one cares about shit under the Trump administration because its an absolute joke that has thus far only stood to get in the way of the way we carry out research. The party of "minimal government" sure as hell loves to tell public established institutions how to carry out their own damn business.

The amount of pressure young kids are under... I am surprised the numbers aren't much higher. I grew up with debilitating OCD/Tourettes. I am glad kids growing up today have more resources than I did. Society itself is sick and broken. If that many kids are having issues.. Maybe the system is the problem here?

Ok.. Let’s ask a different question. Assuming development of super-intelligence is possible.. How do you measure it? What criteria satisfies the “this is super intelligence”? You honestly sound like most pseudo-intellectuals I hear discussing this very topic..: Ironic how you think you’re the brilliant one and it’s others who are stupid… Actually not really ironic a fool doesn’t know he is a fool.

I literally gave you the criterion. You can measure, "I have this model that is supposed to compress data. I have this data. Does it compress the data into fewer bits than other models? Than humans?"

Or, "I have this game and this model. Does the model win the game more often than other models or humans?"

Or, "I have this model that takes in states in an environment and outputs actions. I have this environment. Does the actions it outputs have a higher discounted future entropy than other models or humans?"

Your employees won’t rat you out… Just don’t say “sucky” to those above you. If I have a cool ass manager who looks out for me and is real (I’m lucky enough to be at a MIT lab where everyone is cool as hell), I will always have their back…

If you're a manager, consider not saying that up the org chart is "sucky". Almost certainly no one on your team will go tattle, but it can leak out accidentally, such as when someone is flustered over a problem.

More likely, it will leak out indirectly, in a way, if your team starts thinking of itself a little too much as a group that has to stick together against hostile outsiders within the company, either up the chain or sideways. People outside the team will pick up on that's the tone you're promoting to the team.

But it's not just about not wanting impolitic words to come back to you...

For one thing, it's part of your job to help the team work with the company and people outside the team. Not promote a sense of hostile environment. (If there's an intractably hostile environment, then either that's getting fixed promptly, or your people should be escaping.)

A good manager should have the team's back, especially in a hostile corporate environment, but also insulate the team from a lot of noise including some of what they're being shielded from, as a team and individually. Just like personal life, if you care, you don't have to tell people all the things you do for them.

(I was fortunate to have some awesome managers, who knew when to shield and help me, who knew when to (on rare occasions) lower their voice and tell me something that a drone wouldn't, and who always came across as honest and caring. Some of it rubbed off of me despite my strong-minded personality, and I can always just ask myself what would Bill/Kathy/Nancy/Tom do, to name some of the earliest and most formative ones. All highly skilled engineers first, and later managers/mentors.)

Sucks this is being downvoted. Maturity is hard.

Maturity can be many things, but complaining about internet brownie points is not one of them, at least as far as I'm concerned. People disagree with all kinds of things and that's fine, that comes with the territory of having an opinion.

That's true - wasn't a complaint inasmuch as word of recognition. Parent was grayed out.

I think this is true 90% of the time, but that 10% of the time is really risky. The high stakes of the bad case make it wise (imo) to avoid saying your company's policy "sucks"

Even in situations where this is true, there's almost certainly a better phrasing than "this new policy sucks," which only communicates an emotion. It is imprecise. Listeners will jump to their own conclusions about why you think it sucks.

You can acknowledge the problems more directly: "I get it, we don't have enough chairs so Wednesday is likely to be a challenge." or "I know mandatory 9-5 is going to disrupt your commute."

A bonus of the more precise approach is you can follow up with "do you have other issues with the new policy that I may not know?"

Oh, MIT LL (from your HN bio) seems to be all about top serious engineering and science R&D.

Would you say it's probably a pretty different cultural environment than the established company and tech startup environments that most of HN works in?

Professional Security Researcher here.. I haven't really seen any models reliably find and exploit a 0day. Folks are are at least TRYING to develop such models internally at the MIT lab where I work, but not sure how far along they are coming yet.. If a model is developed that can find a 0day or two (like Big Sleep which I think maybe found some) I won't be surprised but keep in mind fuzzers find thousands of real 0days with far less compute... These capabilities are of course something worth looking into, but too many people are promising 0day oracles already and that simply just isn't where we are right now (or ever? ). Sorry for bad grammar typing quickly from phone here.

It is best used for yack shaving in my opinion. Anything other than that and I feel like I cannot trust its output.

Kind of funny I ended up as a researcher at MIT without having finished my degree some how...

Again... You don't need the "best" engineers to develop some crappy derivative app that probably already exists. 99% of the stuff people are trying to build these days requires nothing more then a few competent engineers.

In fact sometimes hiring "Really Smart" people leads to excessive complication via overactive abstraction as the intellect searches for some way to make your boring problem interesting (to them) :-)

He wants to see a comparison and the article shows no out put comparison. It shows two inputs, says one gives more accurate output than the other without showing us...

Yea they sound like plausible enough arguments.. I often test my vague input against structured ones and for many tasks it didn't seem like hallucinations happened significantly less. Honestly the more structured you have to be, the less "general" your model probably is, and in theory you want your model to be as general as possible. Seems like here, you're simply helping it over-fit.. At least that's what my intuition tells me but I am yet to really check that out either.