= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
MichaelVassar comments on No One Knows Stuff - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (46)
Talisman: what line of work are you in where you interview enough Putnam winners to have a reasonable sample size. Seriously, write to me at my SIAI email about this and I'll try to work it into our recruitment strategy if there's any practical way to do so.
And likewise, can I apply for whatever position you're interviewing these people for? (I mean talisman, not SiAI. I think SIAI requires such unreasonable skills out of me as "tact" and "not voicing why you think other people are idiots".) I'm sure I'd be in the top 1%.
no, we definitely don't require that, but we are a LOT more selective than, say Goldman or D.E. Shaw in other ways and we do require that you be able to function as part of a team.
Wow! That's tough! I don't know if I could ever be more qualified than someone who nearly shut down the entire financial system! ;-)
Well, it generally does take geniuses to achieve something monumentally stupid. Same principle as (unintentionally) creating an Unfriendly AI: current researchers are not competent enough to pose any reasonable risk of it, but a future genius might just fail hard enough.