MVP bugs me sometimes - because oftentimes it is all you end up with. Yeah, it's minimally viable, but wouldn't it be nice to build something with bells and whistles and actually delights users?
demonstrated expertise in one or more domains, can guide other professionals, sets and enforces standards, knows how to manage up and communicate to stakeholders, IT project management knowledge
This is a good answer although I think someone with this ability is approaching the level of lead. It's an ideal senior, but many seniors don't demonstrate all of these qualities.
At a bare minimum I think you're looking at someone who has a solid understanding of the code base and business they're working in.
society and culture are conformity, so to live in a society and/or culture and have some kind of influence or impact, you need to provide some kind of value that others deem as "good." We don't live in a bubble.
>> Large models are trained on public data scraped via API. Content-heavy sites are most likely to be disrupted (why post on StackOverflow?) by models trained on their own data. Naturally, they want to restrict access and either (1) sell the data or (2) train their own models. This restriction prevents (or complicates) Google’ automatic scraping of the data for Search (and probably for training models, too).
This is going to be the interesting part to me - one HUGE usage scenario for AI would be doing automated searches and distilling results from the web - if sites start preventing that then AI innovation could be stifled - OR we'll see a scenario where the average person is very limited with that their AI subscription can access. We could have a situation where e.g. Fandango prevents AI from searching its site to help people plan their movie outing, but instead has their own model that they'll charge for access. We could have models talking to each other, deals made between the owners of the models for access, and the average citizen uses a search engine optimized for monetization, that may have data that's months out of date but they can pay extra for the model that provides current data.
this is where we need to start putting a premium on the customer's time. If a company sell you a product, and you spend 4 hours on the phone with support for an issue that turns out to be their fault, you should get reimbursed or credited for that. If a customer has to spend time repeatedly "turning it off and on again" - the customer should get a credit for that. Yes, this will require companies to use all of their telemetry and logging for tracking lost customer time due to their errors.
FTFY
reply