Microsoft Poaches Top Google DeepMind Staff in AI Talent War (ft.com) 26
Microsoft has recruited more than 20 AI employees from Google's DeepMind research division, the newest front in a talent war being waged by Silicon Valley's tech giants as they jostle to gain an edge in the nascent technology. From a report: Amar Subramanya, the former head of engineering for Google's Gemini chatbot, is the latest to move to Microsoft from its rival, according to a post on his LinkedIn profile on Tuesday. "The culture here is refreshingly low ego yet bursting with ambition," he wrote, confirming his appointment as corporate vice-president of AI.
Subramanya will join other DeepMind staff including engineering lead Sonal Gupta, software engineer Adam Sadovsky and product manager Tim Frank, according to people familiar with Microsoft's recruiting. The Seattle-based company has persuaded at least 24 staff to join in the past six months, they added.
Subramanya will join other DeepMind staff including engineering lead Sonal Gupta, software engineer Adam Sadovsky and product manager Tim Frank, according to people familiar with Microsoft's recruiting. The Seattle-based company has persuaded at least 24 staff to join in the past six months, they added.
Google must be lagging behind (Score:2)
Google is thought to pay better than Microsoft. So this is likely an indicator of a mess at Google/Alphabet leading these staffers to want to jump ship. I can't tell for certain because the article is behind a paywall.
Re:Google must be lagging behind (Score:4, Interesting)
I would love to see the corporate cancers fight to the death--except that the surviving cancer always seems to be worse. They never manage mass suicide.
However, you've motivated me to comment on the job market. Some sort of delusional hope that someone will URL a solution at us?
The top people in productivity terms are above the money thing. They are making lots of money, but they are "top" because of their results, not their greed for more money. Basically a paradox where too much greed prevents good results. These people are not recruited by trying to force them to fit into existing holes (AKA job slots), bur rather the recruiting pitch is inverted, and the position is created to let them do what they want to do which coincides with the most valuable thing they can do. Avocation matches vocation situation. If these googlers are available to any other company, it mostly reflects on problems within the work environment and corporate culture of the google.
Below the top people there is a large pool of good people who are recruited in a kind of balanced race to the bottom. Most of the job slots are clearly defined and the corporate objective is to fill each slot with the human who is capable of doing the work for the smallest salary. This seems to be working pretty well for maximizing profits, and the mental horizon is basically limited to the current accounting period. A "future thinker" is considering the next accounting period, too. But it gets worse when AI is brought into the picture, because well-defined slots are the best targets for occupation by AIs and the AI always becomes cheaper than the humans doing the work. Especially convenient that the AIs can scale by simple copying into additional cloud resources.
So most people seem to be becoming increasingly devalued and even unemployable. You may smell another paradox brewing, but only if you are an old fashioned economist who worries about having customers. The newfangled economists are going to fund everything with cryptocurrency games!
In traditional Slashdot joke format:
1. Get best solution from best creator (possibly stolen from competing corporate cancer)
2. Copy solution as needed
3. Dispose of excess humans and their costs
4. PROFIT
Re: Google must be lagging behind (Score:4, Interesting)
There are a lot of ex-googlers where I work. Most of the commentary I hear from them about working there is that it's basically just like any other place. I haven't asked any of them if they were there prior to 2015 when seemingly everybody wanted to work there.
One thing I can say from first hand experience is that when you have skills that are in-demand, at some point, compensation gradually stops being a consideration for where you choose to work. Instead you're more focused on things like corporate culture, what your company's mission is, what product you're building, etc.
I literally had my boss tell me that, with our company now on my resume, I could work somewhere else and make twice as much. You know what I told him? I couldn't care less. The only real gripe I have with my job is that it has me stuck in California for the time being.
Re: (Score:2)
Hats a pretty serious gripe. I mean, you would have to pay me god-like money to live or work in California.
Re: Google must be lagging behind (Score:2)
Would $360,000 per year do?
Though my boss was talking about my base salary, which is something like $165k.
Though one thing I should add is that part of my compensation includes RSUs that have a long, long history of continuous growth, and that I'm personally betting has much more room to grow.
Re: (Score:2)
Would $360,000 per year do?
Though my boss was talking about my base salary, which is something like $165k.
Though one thing I should add is that part of my compensation includes RSUs that have a long, long history of continuous growth, and that I'm personally betting has much more room to grow.
Not even close. It would have to be more like $2M/year, just to start the conversation.
Re: (Score:2)
That is within the realm of possibility, assuming I hold on to my current shares. The share price has already tripled since I started, and an analyst at some big-shot financial firm has publicly made a prediction that it will grow at an even higher rate than that going forward. We'll see.
Meanwhile, the corporate culture is great here, the coworkers are among the best I've ever had anywhere, I'm 100% on board with the company's mission and I totally believe in the products we make. I honestly can't see mysel
Re: (Score:2)
To be clear, I'm talking $2M salary, with a good chunk up front, not in stock options, stock awards, or other shit that requires "vesting".
Re: (Score:2)
You are overthinking. If you as an individual are offered a very large bonus, you will be very tempted to change a company you don't need to have a mess to do so. Google is the only company that constantly makes progress with the AI. The guys listed here are some which I have never heard of, so I assume they are not really the top staff.
Besides, Google has nothing to worry about as long as Demis Hassabis is in the team.
Re: (Score:2)
Everybody lags behind the claims that are being made and the "demos" that get faked, because most of the things claimed are not even possible at this time and may never be possible. The problem seem to be that some "managers" do not know that.
In retaliation, (Score:3)
Re:In retaliation, (Score:4, Funny)
There is such a thing as Bing talent?
Re: (Score:2)
There is such a thing as Bing talent?
I'm shocked that Bing's "Don't get Scroogled" slogan didn't give Microsoft an advantage!!!!!
Re: In retaliation, (Score:2)
That would imply that Google still cares about creating a search engine that actually works. They stopped doing that over a decade ago and it's been getting progressively worse ever since.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
No idea. I have stopped using Google a few years ago. Just too abysmally bad.
Re: In retaliation, (Score:2)
I've been using startpage. Uses the Google index but maintains the simplicity/minimalism that Google of yore had. Still crap compared to Google of old, but those days are gone and they're not coming back. Meanwhile, no AI shit and no annoying fucking Amazon-like pages that you get anytime your search terms can be even remotely construed as if you're going shopping.
I don't understand (Score:5, Insightful)
Why are they hiring "talent" instead of just using "AI".
On the Slashdot front page right now, it says "100x engineers are here". Why isn't Microsoft using those?
I'm so confused.
Re: (Score:2)
Damn, I'm wiping the tears away now.
Re: (Score:2)
Exactly. And then they should have those 100x engineers create 10'000x engineers in the next step!
20 people are going to make the difference? (Score:2)
I imagine there is lots of money for them after about 10,000 layoffs reported here, in the last month.
Re: (Score:2)
9000 in July and about 6000 earlier this year. SO about 15,000 in 2025 so far. minus 20 of course.
No Egos? (Score:2)
There must be two M$s.
poaching is for eggs and deer (Score:2)
Humans are free agents who make their own decisions. Well, in California anyway, where we don't enforce most noncompetes.
We're not the king's deer, poaching is not a thing.