logo
Should you join a startup or Big Tech out of college? An OpenAI engineer weighs in.

Should you join a startup or Big Tech out of college? An OpenAI engineer weighs in.

Janvi Kalra, an engineer at OpenAI, thinks students should diversify their experiences after college, with at least one internship at a Big Tech firm and another at a startup.
That way, she said on an episode of The Pragmatic Engineer podcast, you have a better idea of what career path you should take.
Kalra interned with Microsoft and Google. She then worked for productivity startup Coda before transitioning into her current role at OpenAI. She said both tracks have advantages and disadvantages.
"The way I saw it, the upside of going to Big Tech was, first, you learn how to build reliable software for scale," Kalra said. "It's very different to build something that works, versus build something that works when it's swarmed with millions of requests from around the world and Redis happens to be down at the same time. Very different skills."
Another good thing about Big Tech, she added, was the amount of time she got to work on projects that were under less pressure to immediately succeed.
"Different upside for Big Tech in general was that you do get to work on more moonshot projects that aren't making money today," Kalra said. "They don't have the same existential crisis that startups do."
And then, of course, more practically, were the financial upsides — including potential prestige.
"There are also practical, good reasons to go to Big Tech," Kalra added. "I'd get my green card faster. I'd get paid more on average. And the unfortunate reality, I think, is that the role does hold more weight. People are more excited about hiring an L5 Google engineer versus an L5 from a startup, especially if that startup doesn't become very successful."
Still, Kalra said, there are "great reasons" to go to a startup, like the sheer amount of experience you'll get with programming itself.
"First, you just ship so much code, right?" she said. "There are more problems than people, and so you get access to these zero-to-one greenfield problems that you wouldn't necessarily get at Big Tech maybe where there are more people than problems."
She said another advantage is the wide array of challenges that'll be thrown at you, allowing you to develop expertise on several fronts.
"Second is the breadth of skills — and this is not just in the software engineering space," she said. "Right from a software engineering space, maybe one quarter you're working on a growth hacking front-end feature, and the next quarter you're writing Terraform. But even in terms of the non-technical skills, you get an insight into how the business works."
Startups also afford you more responsibility, along with a better chance of materially affecting the company with your work, she said.
"You just get more agency in what you work on," she said. "You get the opportunity to propose ideas that you think would be impactful for the business and go execute on it."
Given the opportunity, Kalra said it's best to gain experience with both startups and larger firms as early in your career as possible.
"Given that Big Tech and startups are such different experiences and you learn so much at each, it would be more educational to do one startup internship and one Big Tech internship to get a very robust overview of what both experiences are like very early," she said.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

OpenAI and Microsoft are dueling over AGI. These real-world tests will prove when AI is really better than humans.
OpenAI and Microsoft are dueling over AGI. These real-world tests will prove when AI is really better than humans.

Business Insider

time44 minutes ago

  • Business Insider

OpenAI and Microsoft are dueling over AGI. These real-world tests will prove when AI is really better than humans.

AGI is a pretty silly debate. It's only really important in one way: It governs how the world's most important AI partnership will change in the coming months. That's the deal between OpenAI and Microsoft. This is the situation right now: Until OpenAI achieves Artificial General Intelligence — where AI capabilities surpass those of humans — Microsoft gets a lot of valuable technological and financial benefits from the startup. For instance, OpenAI must share a significant portion of its revenue with Microsoft. That's billions of dollars. One could reasonably argue that this might be why Sam Altman bangs on about OpenAI getting close to AGI soon. Many other experts in the AI field don't talk about this much, or they think the AGI debate is off base in various ways, or just not that important. Even Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei, one of the biggest AI boosters on the planet, doesn't like to talk about AGI. Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella sees things very differently. Wouldn't you? If another company is contractually required to give you oodles of money if they don't reach AGI, then you're probably not going to think we're close to AGI! Nadella has called the push toward AGI "benchmark hacking," which is so delicious. This refers to AI researchers and labs designing AI models to perform well on wonky industry benchmarks, rather than in real life. Here's OpenAI's official definition of AGI: "highly autonomous systems that outperform humans at most economically valuable work." Other experts have defined it slightly differently. But the main point is that AI machines and software must be better than humans at a wide variety of useful tasks. You can already train an AI model to be better at one or two specific things, but to get to artificial general intelligence, machines must be able to do many different things better than humans. Please help BI improve our Business, Tech, and Innovation coverage by sharing a bit about your role — it will help us tailor content that matters most to people like you. Continue By providing this information, you agree that Business Insider may use this data to improve your site experience and for targeted advertising. By continuing you agree that you accept the Terms of Service and Privacy Policy . My real-world AGI tests Over the past few months, I've devised several real-world tests to see if we've reached AGI. These are fun or annoying everyday things that should just work in a world of AGI, but they don't right now for me. I also canvassed input from readers of my Tech Memo newsletter and tapped my source network for fun suggestions. Here are my real-world tests that will prove we've reached AGI: The PR departments of OpenAI and Anthropic use their own AI technology to answer every journalist's question. Right now, these companies are hiring a ton of human journalists and other communications experts to handle a barrage of reporter questions about AI and the future. When I reach out to these companies, humans answer every time. Unacceptable! Unless this changes, we're not at AGI. This suggestion is from a hedge fund contact, and I love it: Please, please can my Microsoft Outlook email system stop burying important emails while still letting spam through? This one seems like something Microsoft and OpenAI could solve with their AI technology. I haven't seen a fix yet. In a similar vein, can someone please stop Cactus Warehouse from texting me every 2 days with offers for 20% off succulents? I only bought one cactus from you guys once! Come on, AI, this can surely be solved! My 2024 Tesla Model 3 Performance hits potholes in FSD. No wonder tires have to be replaced so often on these EVs. As a human, I can avoid potholes much better. Elon, the AGI gauntlet has been thrown down. Get on this now. Can AI models and chatbots make valuable predictions about the future, or do they mostly just regurgitate what's already known on the internet? I tested this recently, right after the US bombed Iran. ChatGPT's stock-picking ability was put to the test versus a single human analyst. Check out the results here. TL;DR: We are nowhere near AGI on this one. There's a great Google Gemini TV ad where a kid is helping his dad assemble a basketball net. The son is using an Android phone to ask Gemini for the instructions and pointing the camera at his poor father struggling with parts and tools. It's really impressive to watch as Gemini finds the instruction manual online just by "seeing" what's going on live with the product assembly. For AGI to be here, though, the AI needs to just build the damn net itself. I can sit there and read out instructions in an annoying way, while someone else toils with fiddly assembly tasks — we can all do that. Yes, I know these tests seem a bit silly — but AI benchmarks are not the real world, and they can be pretty easily gamed. That last basketball net test is particularly telling for me. Getting an AI system and software to actually assemble a basketball net — that might happen sometime soon. But, getting the same system to do a lot of other physical-world manipulation stuff better than humans, too? Very hard and probably not possible for a very long time. As OpenAI and Microsoft try to resolve their differences, the companies can tap experts to weigh in on whether the startup has reached AGI or not, per the terms of their existing contract, according to The Information. I'm happy to be an expert advisor here. Sam and Satya, let me know if you want help! For now, I'll leave the final words to a real AI expert. Konstantin Mishchenko, an AI research scientist at Meta, recently tweeted this, while citing a blog by another respected expert in the field, Sergey Levine: "While LLMs learned to mimic intelligence from internet data, they never had to actually live and acquire that intelligence directly. They lack the core algorithm for learning from experience. They need a human to do that work for them," Mishchenko wrote, referring to AI models known as large language models. "This suggests, at least to me, that the gap between LLMs and genuine intelligence might be wider than we think. Despite all the talk about AGI either being already here or coming next year, I can't shake off the feeling it's not possible until we come up with something better than a language model mimicking our own idea of how an AI should look," he concluded.

OpenAI boss accuses Meta of trying to poach staff with $100m sign-on bonuses
OpenAI boss accuses Meta of trying to poach staff with $100m sign-on bonuses

Yahoo

time2 hours ago

  • Yahoo

OpenAI boss accuses Meta of trying to poach staff with $100m sign-on bonuses

The boss of OpenAI has claimed that Mark Zuckerberg's Meta has tried to poach his top artificial intelligence experts with 'crazy' signing bonuses of $100m (£74m), as the scramble for talent in the booming sector intensifies. Sam Altman spoke about the offers in a podcast on Tuesday. They have not been confirmed by Meta. OpenAI, the company that developed ChatGPT, said it had nothing to add beyond its chief executive's comments. 'They started making these giant offers to a lot of people on our team – $100m signing bonuses, more than that comp [compensation] per year,' Altman told the Uncapped podcast, which is presented by his brother, Jack. 'It is crazy. I'm really happy that, at least so far, none of our best people have decided to take them up on that.' He said: 'I think the strategy of a tonne of upfront, guaranteed comp, and that being the reason you tell someone to join … the degree to which they're focusing on that, and not the work and not the mission – I don't think that's going to set up a great culture.' Meta last week launched a $15bn drive towards computerised 'super-intelligence' – a type of AI that can perform better than humans at all tasks. The company bought a large stake in the $29bn startup Scale AI, set up by the programmer Alexandr Wang, 28, who joined Meta as part of the deal. Last week, a Silicon Valley venture capitalist, Deedy Das, tweeted: 'The AI talent wars are absolutely ridiculous'. Das, a principal at Menlo Ventures, said Meta had been losing AI candidates to rivals despite offering $2m-a-year salaries. Another report last month found that Anthropic, an AI company backed by Amazon and Google and set up by engineers who left Altman's company was 'siphoning top talent from two of its biggest rivals: OpenAI and DeepMind'. The scramble to recruit the best developers comes amid rapid advances in AI technology and a race to achieve human-level AI capacity – known as artificial general intelligence. The spending on hardware is greater still, with recent estimates from the Carlyle Group, reported by Bloomberg, that $1.8tn could be spent on computing power by 2030. That is more than the annual gross domestic product of Australia. Some tech firms are buying whole companies to lock in top talent, as seen in part with Meta's Scale AI deal and Google spending $2.7bn last year on which was founded by the leading AI researcher Noam Shazeer. He co-wrote the 2017 research paper Attention is all you Need, which is considered a seminal contribution to the current wave of large language model AI systems. While Meta was founded as a social media company and OpenAI as non-profit – becoming a for-profit business last year – the two are now rivals. Altman told his brother's podcast that he did not feel Meta would succeed in it's AI push, adding: 'I don't think they're a company that's great at innovation.' He said he had once heard Zuckerberg say that it had seemed rational for Google to try to develop a social media function in the early days of Facebook, but 'it was clear to people at Facebook that that was not going to work'. 'I feel a little bit similar here,' Altman added. Despite the huge investments in the sector, Altman suggested the result could be 'we build legitimate super intelligence, and it doesn't make the world much better [and] doesn't change things as much as it sounds like it should'. 'The fact that you can have this thing do this amazing stuff for you, and you kind of live your life the same way you did two years ago,' he said. 'The thing that I think will be the most impactful in that five to 10-year timeframe is AI will actually discover new science. This is a crazy claim to make, but I think it is true, and if it is correct, then over time I think that will dwarf everything else [AI has achieved].'

Mark Zuckerberg's secret list of top AI talent to poach has tech world atwitter
Mark Zuckerberg's secret list of top AI talent to poach has tech world atwitter

Yahoo

time2 hours ago

  • Yahoo

Mark Zuckerberg's secret list of top AI talent to poach has tech world atwitter

Mark Zuckerberg reportedly spent months putting together a list of the top AI engineers and researchers across the globe, preparing to offer potential recruits lucrative compensation packages in Meta's attempt to poach AI talent from key competitors. Silicon Valley has been talking for weeks about the Meta CEO's quest to attract top AI talent, including by offering pay packages worth up to $100m. Zuckerberg has personally reached out to desired candidates, according to the Wall Street Journal. Meta, which owns Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp, has been competing in the search for AI dominance with rivals like OpenAI, Google, Microsoft and Amazon, which have invested billions of dollars into AI research and product development. Last month, questions were raised about the direction of Meta's AI development after it delayed the scheduled rollout of Behemoth, its flagship AI model. Earlier this month, Meta paid $14bn for a stake in Scale AI and is putting its founder, 28-year-old Alexandr Wang, in charge of its 'superintelligence team' – an internal lab that would focus on Meta's efforts to develop a hypothetical AI system that is smarter than humans. Last year, Google bought out the shareholders in a chatbot service that allows users to have personal conversations with different AI personas, for $2.7bn. People on 'the list', as Zuckerberg's slate is known around Silicon Valley, include recent graduates from top PhD programs at schools like the University of California at Berkeley and Carnegie Mellon. Many are currently employed by Meta's AI competitors, including OpenAI and Google's DeepMind project, and have traded notes with each other on Meta's recruiting efforts. A recruit who has personally spoken to Zuckerberg said that his goal appears to be a 'transfusion from the country's top AI labs'. A WhatsApp group chat called 'Recruiting Party' was formed for Zuckerberg and at least two other senior Meta executives to talk through potential hires. The Meta CEO has been trying to personally find candidates by looking through research papers, according to the Wall Street Journal. Zuckerberg's hands-on recruiting efforts have drawn the ire of OpenAI chief executive Sam Altman, who called the rumored signing bonuses and compensation packages on offer 'crazy'. 'I'm really happy that, at least so far, none of our best people have decided to take them up on that,' Altman said during an appearance on the Uncapped podcast, which is hosted by his brother Jack. 'I think the strategy of a ton of upfront, guaranteed comp, and that being the reason you tell someone to join, like really the degree to which they're focusing on that and not the work and not the mission, I don't think that's going to set up a great culture.'

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store