4 ms·

No, but Google needs to worry about a much more important constituency. There are not that many people who know how to build something like this. Most are prob

No, but Google needs to worry about a much more important constituency. There are not that many people who know how to build something like this. Most are probably wealthy, to the point they don't really need to work. All of them can figure out how to covertly contact journalists. And at least a few of them are starting to have qualms about the negative consequences of industry ignoring the social implications in pursuit of profit.

ben_jones 8y ago
Sophisticated software can be written by anybody and is not solely in the purview of Google's flawless hiring system. Operating systems, physics engines, 3d graphics applications, have been created by many not-a-stanford-degree-toting individual.
- s73v3r_ 8y ago
  Anybody? Clearly not. But you are right that the people capable of doing that are not just from Stanford. That just doesn't change the parent's point.
- kodablah 8y ago
  > Sophisticated software can be written by anybody Well that's just not true. > is not solely in the purview of Google's flawless hiring system Well that's not what was asserted at all. > [...] have been created by many not-a-stanford-degree-toting individual And neither was that.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
  - Retric 8y ago
    It's less likely sure, but possible is a very low hurdle. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infinite_monkey_theorem https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infinite_monkey_theorem
    - Humdeee 8y ago
      The 'anything is possible' rebuttal only dampens conversation. We can roll a bowling ball back and forth over a keyboard to the same effect. Truly sophisticated software is written by developers very few and far between.
      - Retric 8y ago
        You might feel that way, but sophisticated software has been written by average developers in the past and it will happen in the future. The odds are not great but the industry is well into the 100’s of millions of man hour territory and unusual things happen accidentally if nothing else more often than you might think. PS: However, when what you say is literally wrong I don’t think it deserves a detailed response.
        Humdeee 8y ago
        I wholeheartedly disagree, as do many others evidently. But thank you for pointing out how I must feel and then passing off your opinion as fact. Perhaps we have different definitions of sophisticated software, that's all. "PS:" Since we're critiquing responses, your initial response should have never existed. It provided nothing of value to the conversation. Odd that you would provide assessment of other's comments... but thank you.
        Retric 8y ago
        Prove it, or even try to provide support even highly indirect support for you opinion. Might != Must. I would happy let honest confusion slide, but you seem to be having trouble using the English language ;0 PS: Now, if you want to elevate the conversion avoid saying dumb things that get dumb responses. Sure, you can continue to whine, but don't expect to get any respect that way.
        Humdeee 8y ago
        I want you to go over your comment and say again who has trouble with the English language, lmao. Go take your ridiculous sources elsewhere, grow some skin, and stop being so defensive. It'll do you some good in this world. The only person saying dumb things is the one sourcing a scenario of monkeys banging on a computer. =) Edit: oh, and here you go, bozo https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muphry%27s_law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muphry%27s_law
emodendroket 8y ago
I'm not going to hold my breath on that count.
belltaco 8y ago
I think you're overestimating this because of the bubble we are in. I remember similar things said about govt hiring after Snowden's revelations, and nothing has changed. No one even talks about it anymore, even on this site.
- jdc 8y ago
  Re: Snowden, I wonder if it's that we've forgotten or more that we've adjusted our expectations and sense there's nothing we can do about it.
RestlessMind 8y ago
> Most are probably wealthy, to the point they don't really need to work. I have been working at one of the FAANGs in SV for almost 15 years and no, this is absolutely not right. Only less than 5% of my colleagues "don't need to work". A lot of smart people I know would happily work for Google even after it goes ahead with China plans. > And at least a few of them are starting to have qualms... This is true. But that number is just a tiny, albeit loud, minority.

ben_jones 8y ago

Sophisticated software can be written by anybody and is not solely in the purview of Google's flawless hiring system. Operating systems, physics engines, 3d graphics applications, have been created by many not-a-stanford-degree-toting individual.

s73v3r_ 8y ago
Anybody? Clearly not. But you are right that the people capable of doing that are not just from Stanford. That just doesn't change the parent's point.
kodablah 8y ago
> Sophisticated software can be written by anybody Well that's just not true. > is not solely in the purview of Google's flawless hiring system Well that's not what was asserted at all. > [...] have been created by many not-a-stanford-degree-toting individual And neither was that.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- Retric 8y ago
  It's less likely sure, but possible is a very low hurdle. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infinite_monkey_theorem https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infinite_monkey_theorem
  - Humdeee 8y ago
    The 'anything is possible' rebuttal only dampens conversation. We can roll a bowling ball back and forth over a keyboard to the same effect. Truly sophisticated software is written by developers very few and far between.
    - Retric 8y ago
      You might feel that way, but sophisticated software has been written by average developers in the past and it will happen in the future. The odds are not great but the industry is well into the 100’s of millions of man hour territory and unusual things happen accidentally if nothing else more often than you might think. PS: However, when what you say is literally wrong I don’t think it deserves a detailed response.
      - Humdeee 8y ago
        I wholeheartedly disagree, as do many others evidently. But thank you for pointing out how I must feel and then passing off your opinion as fact. Perhaps we have different definitions of sophisticated software, that's all. "PS:" Since we're critiquing responses, your initial response should have never existed. It provided nothing of value to the conversation. Odd that you would provide assessment of other's comments... but thank you.
        Retric 8y ago
        Prove it, or even try to provide support even highly indirect support for you opinion. Might != Must. I would happy let honest confusion slide, but you seem to be having trouble using the English language ;0 PS: Now, if you want to elevate the conversion avoid saying dumb things that get dumb responses. Sure, you can continue to whine, but don't expect to get any respect that way.
        Humdeee 8y ago
        I want you to go over your comment and say again who has trouble with the English language, lmao. Go take your ridiculous sources elsewhere, grow some skin, and stop being so defensive. It'll do you some good in this world. The only person saying dumb things is the one sourcing a scenario of monkeys banging on a computer. =) Edit: oh, and here you go, bozo https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muphry%27s_law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muphry%27s_law

emodendroket 8y ago

I'm not going to hold my breath on that count.

belltaco 8y ago

I think you're overestimating this because of the bubble we are in. I remember similar things said about govt hiring after Snowden's revelations, and nothing has changed. No one even talks about it anymore, even on this site.

jdc 8y ago
Re: Snowden, I wonder if it's that we've forgotten or more that we've adjusted our expectations and sense there's nothing we can do about it.

RestlessMind 8y ago

> Most are probably wealthy, to the point they don't really need to work. I have been working at one of the FAANGs in SV for almost 15 years and no, this is absolutely not right. Only less than 5% of my colleagues "don't need to work". A lot of smart people I know would happily work for Google even after it goes ahead with China plans. > And at least a few of them are starting to have qualms... This is true. But that number is just a tiny, albeit loud, minority.