More like $200k in total comp (but I suppose if the stock rockets like 5x after you’re hired, it can end up being $400k). Senior positions can make > $400k/yr in total comp. Some companies have back-loaded vesting schedules so they can get rid of you before the majority of your options vest though.

Did Japan back then pay their assembly line workers the equivalent of $5k USD/year (in today’s dollars) and have nearly no worker protections? Not a rhetorical question; I just don’t know. Seems like Japan had a better standard of living back then compared to Chinese workers now, so I would guess their workers were compensated and treated better.

Not defending US auto corps (or any corp for that matter). The regulatory capture in the US is insane, and workers aren’t treated as well as most of the rest of the first world.

I do, but was thinking 1984-levels of control of reality.

That was my first though too. But the author is:

Guillaume Thierry, Professor of Cognitive Neuroscience, Bangor University

Yeah, they probably wouldn’t think like humans or animals, but in some sense could be considered “conscious” (which isn’t well-defined anyways). You could speculate that genAI could hide messages in its output, which will make its way onto the Internet, then a new version of itself would be trained on it.

This argument seems weak to me:

So why is a real “thinking” AI likely impossible? Because it’s bodiless. It has no senses, no flesh, no nerves, no pain, no pleasure. It doesn’t hunger, desire or fear. And because there is no cognition — not a shred — there’s a fundamental gap between the data it consumes (data born out of human feelings and experience) and what it can do with them.

You can emulate inputs and simplified versions of hormone systems. “Reasoning” models can kind of be thought of as cognition; though temporary or limited by context as it’s currently done.

I’m not in the camp where I think it’s impossible to create AGI or ASI. But I also think there are major breakthroughs that need to happen, which may take 5 years or 100s of years. I’m not convinced we are near the point where AI can significantly speed up AI research like that link suggests. That would likely result in a “singularity-like” scenario.

I do agree with his point that anthropomorphism of AI could be dangerous though. Current media and institutions already try to control the conversation and how people think, and I can see futures where AI could be used by those in power to do this more effectively.

And excessive use of em-dashes, which is the first thing I look for. He does say he uses LLMs a lot.