Top
Best
New

Posted by frays 1 day ago

Anthropic CEO reportedly worried new hires only care about money(finance.yahoo.com)
64 points | 82 comments
ogou 1 day ago|
I know a lot of good people that got thrown away by mission focussed companies. They were loyal and put with all kinds of BS for those companies. I was laid off from jobs I went way above and beyond for. They didn't hesitate. They are the ones that turned us all into disposable mercenaries. Why wouldn't we go for the money? What else are they offering, thumbs up emojis?
pixelatedindex 15 hours ago|
If only I could pay my bills with thumbs up emojis. I can even double my offering from one to two!
mawadev 1 day ago||
The concept of job security and stability has been broken, so everyone is too busy securing their future by collecting as much money before there is another record profit layoff!
qurren 1 day ago||
This. Let me know when I can pay for a Chipotle meal or rent in mission statements. Until then saving up money is important.
hahahaa 1 day ago||
Yep we are all bogleheads now
BikDk 23 hours ago||
Wait until the Hiob question hits that believe system. In the end its just a matter of if we put the bank inside or outside of the temple. Anyway, it never worked in an agnostic way.
hasley 1 day ago||
I, as an engineer, shall work for a mission and not (so much) for money. But as soon as the mission can possibly be completed without me using the latest shiny AI tool, it is okay for the company to get rid of me.
r_lee 23 hours ago|
wow, what a beautiful and brave statement. thank you for your service
briga 1 day ago||
Here's an idea: instead of paying your employees $800k, how about you cut their pay to $80k. See how many of them are truly in it for the mission.
worldthruword 1 day ago||
"Ask not what your Company can do for you —ask what you can do for your Company". - Anthropic CEO.
keeda 1 day ago||
Maybe more like "Ask not what AGI can do for you -- ask what you can do for AGI." ;-)
Frenchgeek 1 day ago|||
Let's start with the CEO's pay.
hahahaa 1 day ago|||
The good ones go work for OpenAI. And they lose any chance in the race.
ASalazarMX 10 hours ago||
Guess they should stop whining then. I can't see why is that a problem, maybe they'd like to pay less so they can pay more themselves?
Maxion 1 day ago|||
Nah just go a step further and offer dorm accomodation and some slop for food, and then let people volonteer.
mirzap 1 day ago|||
Anyone who thinks people work for anything other than money is delusional. Anyone who works for "the mission" is an idiot - no company or billionaire running a company cares about you. They will let you go in a heart beat.
matwood 1 day ago|||
I agree with you mostly, and it’s important for everyone to understand. With that said, not everyone maximizes for only money.
mirzap 1 day ago||
Yup, I agree. I’m just clarifying what I meant by my original comment here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49206654
dijit 1 day ago||||
I’m aware of this (consciously) but I would really do my job if it was unpaid, in fact: many do (and did) in the form of side projects and volunteering and FOSS.

I was always weirded out by the “only in IT for the money” crowd, which is a lot more than the people in it for passion these days it seems, and I might be an extreme case, but consider that while I run an IRC community- I do not write open source software.

janalsncm 1 day ago||
I do a ton of side projects that personally interest me. I’m mainlining hard technical problems with zero need for permissions or waiting on bureaucracy or jira tickets. If a decision needs to be made, I don’t have to wait until next week when all of the “stakeholders” are available to talk about it. I figure it out myself.

If my day job was a side project I wouldn’t work on it at all.

dijit 1 day ago||
to be fair with you, I have a huge intolerance to that bureaucracy, likely in part due to my passion.

I think it would genuinely be the same for me.

mrheosuper 1 day ago||||
I disagree, while money is a really important factor, that's not the final. Personally, I've changed to lower paid job to work on something i am more interested in.
mirzap 1 day ago|||
I agree. We all make these kinds of trade-offs sometimes. We trade some amount of money for peace of mind, more interesting work, better colleagues, a healthier environment, and so on.

But I never buy the "mission" story, or the "we’re a family" line. We’re not a family, and I’m not on a mission.

I’m fine with the word "vision." I’ll be part of your vision if I find it interesting or if I believe in it too. But I’m not on a mission to achieve it.

To me, "mission" implies sacrifice and renunciation - whether that means sacrificing your lifestyle, your time, or your family. I’m not doing that.

matwood 1 day ago||
I'm fine if leaders talk about mission and vision as long as it's to inspire and not in lieu of money. The right amount of money is table stakes. The problems start when leaders begin replacing money with mission, and people buy it.

I know a lot of people didn't like the harshness of the scene in Mad Men where Don tells Peggy, that's what the money is for, but people would be good to remember it. I tell people who work for me if someone offers you a lot more money than I can, take it!

ruperthair 1 day ago|||
I agree with you, but I don't think the parent post was arguing for money being the only factor, just a big one.

Would I work 9-5 for no money: No! Would I move from a shitty 9-5 to a less shitty one while taking an affordable pay cut: Yes.

ASalazarMX 10 hours ago||||
People can work for passion, some times even contrary to their own self interests, especially when you're starting your career. You hopefully grow out of it when you become established because companies don't pay large salaries for passion.

I've not seen smart professionals put passion before money unless it's their own company, and that's becaue they expect to earn quite a lot in the future, so it's usually money first, and that's OK because you need it to live comfortably.

MattPalmer1086 21 hours ago||||
I turned down a better paid, lower stress role recently where I would have been working with good people I liked and had worked with before.

Main reason was a sense of mission. If I screwed up in that role, a billionaire would have been a tiny bit poorer but literally nobody else would care. My current role involves critical global infrastructure, everyone would notice if we screwed up.

Having said that, money is still very important. I am pretty well remunerated - more would be nice but I'm not hurting.

breppp 1 day ago||||
He is right, when a startup becomes successful the hiring pool becomes different. For example, you won't see people who came for politics-sake before real money is on the table.

This can kill the culture and make the actual people that were shipping unhappy

win311fwg 1 day ago|||
> Anyone who thinks people work for anything other than money is delusional.

I work so that I am given food, shelter, entertainment, etc. at some point in the future in exchange for what I have given. Money is just the IOU that records the promise that I will receive those things later. I'm sure there is someone out there who is driven by the desire to collect IOUs and nothing more, but everyone (else but me)?

ben_w 22 hours ago||
There will be be plenty of people, they just wouldn't be in Silicon Valley. Or possibly anywhere in the USA.

$800k/year in the UK is "Buy nice house in commuter belt in one year without bothering with a mortgage, three years if you want somewhere or something fancy but still not aristocratic, ten years if you do want aristocratic".

janalsncm 1 day ago||
Be careful what you wish for. Ideological employees exist, and they might even work for less. But that doesn’t mean they will always agree with Dario’s ideology. This is something Google has found out.

And when those ideological people start making noises about the ways they disagree with the company, he might miss the more mercenary employees.

m132 1 day ago||
It's an industry where companies with "open" right in the name lobby against open models and training on stolen data is viewed as more ethical than training on existing models. It takes some time to catch up with reality there.
jdw64 1 day ago|
So Anthropic studied humanity, and their big discovery was: new hires care about money. Peak anthropology.
wewewedxfgdf 1 day ago||
Dario Amodei is the Woody Allen of the AI world always worried and neurotic about something.
pixelatedindex 1 day ago||
Aren't they (where they = tech CEOs, at least) all?
hansmayer 1 day ago||
[dead]
ingonealan3 1 day ago||
It's funny when these executives, on one side, will happily lay people off, implement attrition policies, or engage in morally-questionable behaviors, all with the purpose of maximize profits, while on the other hand blame the employees that they don't care about the company, and are only in it for the money. It's a thinly veiled way of saying "only I am allowed to play the game as the ruthless capitalist".
altairprime 1 day ago||
Yes, that's the exact greedy classism that the century-ago Gilded Age made well-known to dedicated students of U.S. history today. I'd be shocked if 1% of students who passed an handwritten-essay history exam in the past fifty years remember it at all. On the plus side, at least we don't have to reinvent terminology for this: it's all already written down and studied in depth and condensed into a two hours PBS documentary so that anyone in the cog class today can learn about it — even if they've been largely been denied literacy by the leadership class starving out public education:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yjpYzFtxfjU via https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/americanexperience/films/gilded-age...

mypalmike 1 day ago||
I once worked as a contractor at a startup whose CEO had little trophies on display in a wall case showing off funding rounds for previous startups. There were like 3 employees and 15 contractors, and he had one of the contractors give a speech about believing in the mission or whatever. It was laughable. I was only there a couple months and found out later they got bought out by the largest company in the space. He probably bought a few more tacky red Ferraris after that.
imjonse 1 day ago||
If he were not such openly against open models and China, his potential hiring pool would include more idealistic people.
Ekaros 1 day ago|
So surely they will fix by lowering wages and other compensation of all their executives and other high level people to minimum wage. Thus getting only those people who care about mission and not money.

Or does it only apply to workers and not people in the lead?

More comments...