3 ms·
I have worked for Amazon (although not in AWS). The compensation was ok at the time, but starting to lag their peers by the time I left (within a year of leavi
by jsolson 10y ago
I have worked for Amazon (although not in AWS).
The compensation was ok at the time, but starting to lag their peers by the time I left (within a year of leaving my comp had a little more than doubled). My understanding is that they've made an effort to catch up there. Regardless, Pittsburgh is a staggeringly cheap place to live (I grew up there) while Seattle is decidedly not (I live there now). Unless he's tripled his comp, he'll be making effectively less. That wasn't my point, though, I assume he's not moving for the money.
I was actually talking about resources to dedicate to research.
What makes you think Amazon will be willing to supply compute (assuming they actually have substantial excess cycles to sell, particularly on GPUs, FPGAs, or ASICs) to internal development efforts? Simply having the resource doesn't mean making it available. Actually making appropriate resources available to people trying to solve problems would run completely counter to my experience there.
- mattkrause 10y agoI don't have any inside information or anything like that, but...they are hiring him to extend his previous research on large-scale machine learning systems. As the lab head, I imagine he won't have a hard time getting resources--they must have given him something like a startup package to lure him there. As a big name, they have a strong incentive to keep him happy: if he were to leave in a justifiable huff (e.g., "they promised me tons of compute and all I got were these Fire Phones"), it would make recruiting much harder.