Latest news with #talentwar
Yahoo
17 hours ago
- Business
- Yahoo
AI researcher ‘turns down $1bn pay offer from Mark Zuckerberg'
A tech worker has reportedly turned down a $1bn (£750m) pay deal to join Mark Zuckerberg's artificial intelligence (AI) unit amid an escalating war for talent in Silicon Valley. Mr Zuckerberg's Meta reportedly offered several researchers who work at Thinking Machines, a San Francisco-based AI start-up, packages worth hundreds of millions of dollars to join the social media giant. One of those packages would have been worth as much as $1bn over several years, according to a report from Wired, while some researchers were also offered between $200m and $500m over a four-year period. Most deals included an award worth $50m to $100m in the first year. So far, no staff at the start-up have taken up an offer from Meta. Last month, Thinking Machines raised $2bn at a $12bn valuation, despite having no product. A spokesman for Meta disputed the claims, although confirmed it had made a 'handful' of offers to staff at Thinking Machines. 'We made offers only to a handful of people at Thinking Machines and while there was one sizeable offer, the details are off,' the spokesman said. Thinking Machines was founded by 36-year-old Mira Murati, a former OpenAI executive who has become one of the powerful women in tech since launching the company. AI arms race The eye-watering pay offers come amid an AI arms race, with tech giants trying to tempt leading AI scientists and programmers to join their efforts over those of rivals. Sam Altman, the chief executive of OpenAI which owns ChatGPT, previously claimed Meta had offered his staff deals worth as much as $100m. Mr Zuckerberg has been personally leading a recruitment drive to attract leading scientists and developers to a new lab within Meta in a race against rivals to build highly powerful AI tools. The Meta chief executive has reportedly been reaching out to dozens of targets with personalised WhatsApp messages and bumper pay deals. Meta is spending tens of billions of dollars on AI data centres that will be used to help create more powerful machine-learning tools that Mr Zuckerberg has claimed could soon transform the economy and society. He has also already recruited around 50 leading researchers and experts for a new 'superintelligence' lab within Meta, after growing frustrated at the lack of progress by his own engineers. Earlier this year, Meta delayed a major update to its AI technology, dubbed Behemoth. Mr Zuckerberg also engineered a $14.3bn deal to poach Alexandr Wang, the founder of AI business Scale AI, to lead his new team, acquiring a 49pc stake in the start-up in the process. Se produjo un error al recuperar la información Inicia sesión para acceder a tu portafolio Se produjo un error al recuperar la información Se produjo un error al recuperar la información Se produjo un error al recuperar la información Se produjo un error al recuperar la información
Telegraph
17 hours ago
- Business
- Telegraph
AI researcher ‘turns down $1bn pay offer from Mark Zuckerberg'
A tech worker has reportedly turned down a $1bn (£750m) pay deal to join Mark Zuckerberg's artificial intelligence (AI) unit amid an escalating war for talent in Silicon Valley. Mr Zuckerberg's Meta reportedly offered several researchers who work at Thinking Machines, a San Francisco-based AI start-up, packages worth hundreds of millions of dollars to join the social media giant. One of those packages would have been worth as much as $1bn over several years, according to a report from Wired, while some researchers were also offered between $200m and $500m over a four-year period. Most deals included an award worth $50m to $100m in the first year. So far, no staff at the start-up have taken up an offer from Meta. Last month, Thinking Machines raised $2bn at a $12bn valuation, despite having no product. A spokesman for Meta disputed the claims, although confirmed it had made a 'handful' of offers to staff at Thinking Machines. 'We made offers only to a handful of people at Thinking Machines and while there was one sizeable offer, the details are off,' the spokesman said. Thinking Machines was founded by 36-year-old Mira Murati, a former OpenAI executive who has become one of the powerful women in tech since launching the company. AI arms race The eye-watering pay offers come amid an AI arms race, with tech giants trying to tempt leading AI scientists and programmers to join their efforts over those of rivals. Sam Altman, the chief executive of OpenAI which owns ChatGPT, previously claimed Meta had offered his staff deals worth as much as $100m. Mr Zuckerberg has been personally leading a recruitment drive to attract leading scientists and developers to a new lab within Meta in a race against rivals to build highly powerful AI tools. The Meta chief executive has reportedly been reaching out to dozens of targets with personalised WhatsApp messages and bumper pay deals. Meta is spending tens of billions of dollars on AI data centres that will be used to help create more powerful machine-learning tools that Mr Zuckerberg has claimed could soon transform the economy and society. He has also already recruited around 50 leading researchers and experts for a new 'superintelligence' lab within Meta, after growing frustrated at the lack of progress by his own engineers. Earlier this year, Meta delayed a major update to its AI technology, dubbed Behemoth. Mr Zuckerberg also engineered a $14.3bn deal to poach Alexandr Wang, the founder of AI business Scale AI, to lead his new team, acquiring a 49pc stake in the start-up in the process.
CNA
2 days ago
- Business
- CNA
Meta's year of bold 'superintelligence' bets unlikely to pump profits
It's crunch time for Mark Zuckerberg as he pulls out all the stops to stay relevant in Silicon Valley's intensifying advanced artificial intelligence race. The Meta CEO has sparked a billion-dollar talent war, aggressively poaching researchers from rivals including OpenAI. But as Meta's spending rises, so does the pressure it faces to deliver returns. For the second quarter, though, Wall Street is bracing for disappointment as the company is set to report its slowest profit growth in two years on Wednesday, rising by 11.5 per cent to $15.01 billion, as operating costs jump nearly 9 per cent. Revenue, too, likely grew at its slowest pace in seven quarters in that period, up an expected 14.7 per cent to $44.80 billion, according to an average analyst estimate from LSEG. While Zuckerberg is no stranger to high-stakes pursuits - Meta's augmented-reality unit has burned more than $60 billion since 2020 - his latest push comes with added urgency because of the underwhelming performance of the company's large language Llama 4 model. He recently pledged hundreds of billions of dollars to build massive AI data centers and shelled out $14.3 billion for a stake in startup Scale AI, poaching its 28-year-old billionaire CEO Alexandr Wang, even as Meta continued to lay off people. Investors have largely backed Zuckerberg's frenzied pursuit of superintelligence - a hypothetical concept where AI surpasses human intelligence in every possible way - pushing the company's stock up more than a fifth so far this year. But they will watch if Meta further increases its capital expenditure for the year after boosting it in April. Alphabet also upped the ante last week, increasing its annual capex forecast by 13 per cent to $85 billion due to surging demand for its AI-powered Google Cloud services. "We view rising capex as positive given... Meta can become a one-stop shop for many marketing departments," said Ben Barringer, head of technology research at Quilter Cheviot, which holds Meta shares. Lagging efforts from Alphabet's Google DeepMind and OpenAI, Meta launched a Superintelligence Lab last month that will work in parallel to Meta AI, the company's established AI research division, led by deep learning pioneer, Yann LeCun. To differentiate its efforts, Zuckerberg has promised to release Meta's AI work as open source and touted that superintelligence can become a mainstream consumer product through devices like Ray-Ban Meta smartglasses, rather than a purely enterprise-focused technology. The strategy plays to Meta's strengths, analysts say, pointing to its more than 3-billion strong social media user base and engagement gains in recent years, driven by AI-enhanced content targeting. Still, Meta's mainstay advertising market is under threat from advertisers pulling back spending in the face of President Donald Trump's tariffs, and tough competition from Chinese-owned TikTok, whose U.S. ban now seems unlikely. Some advertisers may have leaned on proven platforms such as Meta amid the uncertainty, but that will not shield the company from questions over its superintelligence ambitions and how they fit into its broader business strategy, said Minda Smiley, senior analyst at eMarketer. "While Meta has seen massive gains from incorporating AI into its ad platform and algorithms, its attempts to directly compete with the likes of OpenAI are proving to be more challenging while costing it billions of dollars." Questions remain about when superintelligence can be achieved, a timeline Zuckerberg admits is uncertain. Meta's LeCun is also a known skeptic of the large language model path to superintelligence.
Forbes
2 days ago
- Business
- Forbes
Discover The Unseen Gap In C-Suite And Provider Compensation Strategies
Many non-profit healthcare organizations face a significant unseen gap in their strategies to win the talent war. Competition for the most sought-after C-Suite and Providers is at an all-time high. In this battle, a crucial element of balanced compensation packages – retirement income replacement – has largely been an afterthought. Organizations on the journey to become Destination Employers have awakened this sleeping giant. They've discovered that while market rate cash and bonus pay are effective for initial attraction, they lack the fire power to retain key leadership amidst uncertain times of growth, acquisition and major C-Suite transitions. Historic cash-is-king strategies are rapidly losing their competitive edge. Incumbent pre-tax and post-tax solutions such as 457(b), 457(f) and 162 bonus plans are burdened by excessive taxation on contributions or benefits. These tax treatments siphon your organization's investment and dramatically reduce participants' net take-home value. In this rapidly changing landscape, how will your organization prevail? Win the talent war: three core componentsUndesired surprises: competition to attract and retain Surprise #1: inability to compete for top talent Here's a recent true story from a leading healthcare system. A nationally renowned surgeon who brought a substantial following to the organization was earning $2 million in cash pay. He was courted by a competing organization for $3 million in cash pay. The sought after surgeon declined the offer. Why? The extra million translated to less than $500,000/year in after-tax take-home pay for a seven-year contract period ($3.5M total). Meanwhile, his current employer had raised the ante, offering a new retirement benefit equaling $500,000 tax free for 20 years (total of $10M).Surprise #2: shell shock of unsustainable retirement Top C-Suite and Providers devote their careers to the service of others in a non-profit environment. Many have been so focused on your enterprise's success, they haven't allocated the bandwidth to understanding their own retirement picture. These leaders have grown your bottom line and created cultural glue. What is the message of gratitude imbued in your existing retirement income plans? When your key people retire, will they experience a soft and prosperous landing – feeling validated for a career of service? Or will they be devastated by a shocking reality – perhaps 20 to 30% of their previous salary? In compensation design strategies, meaningful supplemental retirement income has largely fallen short. Yet when appropriate income replacement plans are implemented, we see executive leadership both choosing to join and staying longer, even pushing back retirement dates to cement continuity in leadership transitions. Importantly, newer plan designs can catch people up, even with only two years left until retirement. These plans use a classic target income formula: a benefit equal to 2.5% of final average cash pay multiplied by years of service and capped at a maximum total benefit of 50% of final pay. The Value of Voice: art and science of an effective total rewards strategy We know from our work with over 150 non-profit healthcare organizations, that when cherished leaders feel heard, they join and stay. Plan design is not solely a journey of technical excellence. Creating momentum – and helping to ensure execution – requires an art and science approach. Art means inviting multiple stakeholders' voices to the planning table. Each leadership role has their own accountability metrics and belief system for the overall plan. Meanwhile, communication about one's own compensation requires a safe setting. Effective plan design includes outside advisory support to elicit all stakeholder voices, facilitate consensus and amalgamate them into a seamless vision. When the architects of the plan see their voices reflected in the plan, the collective leadership is empowered to implement.A successful journey invites the agendas and needs of each leadership domain and every influencer Science is the technical aspects of plan design. Importantly, many organizations are beholden to either a single plan design, or designs that have long been usurped by new regime plans with substantially greater optics and efficiencies. To maximize your budget's potential, it's essential to consider multiple plan types including custom hybrids. Thorough, prudent financial modeling is paramount. Executive leadership deserves to see not just the rose-colored glasses but the potential risks and downsides. Their boards of directors expect answers to undiscovered questions Throughout our 55 years in business, we've long believed that the questions we ask are far more powerful in our clients' worlds than the statements we could make. For many, the secret weapon to win the talent war sits in their blind spot. Savvy organizations are highly intentional in their compensation strategy design, doing the best they can within constrained budgets, and board level scrutiny. Optics and stakeholder agendas can make it difficult to achieve momentum and approval for new or different plans. The prevailing sentiment? The topic is both covered and complete. In reality, the topic is just beginning. Some of the largest organizations in the country have already awakened the sleeping giant and implemented robust plans to fill the retirement income gap. Many are 18 to 24 months ahead of the competitive curve. They are courting the same talent you wish to hire. Their recruiters will proselytize those you need to retain. The plan design landscape has trends and seasons just like any other highly technical discipline. It is influenced by the financial markets, tax code, legal landscape and the insurance marketplace. Organizations that have not explored their options in the past 24 months may be surprised to discover dramatic increases in plans are burdened by inefficiencies…New regime plans are your partner in possibility…The opportunity cost of inaction Doing business in today's non-profit healthcare environment is more costly and complex than ever. Every new investment is subject to intensive scrutiny regarding return on investment (ROI) and internal rates of return (ROR). On the journey to recruit, retain and reward top talent, we offer an expanded perspective. Which costs more: the investment to keep great leaders in place, or the emotional and financial cost of re-recruiting a beloved leader? If one leaves, other dominoes follow. What is the cost to rebuild talent, team and culture? 'When you invest in the right C-Suite leaders and exceptional Provider talent, the ROI is infinite.' Russ Rudish, Rudish HealthWhether by intention or default, executive compensation plans are the voice of your enterprise's vision and core values. What does your strategy tell those impacted by its current provisions, pending surprises or missing components? Consider engaging a firm to learn what you have and obtain side-by-side comparisons of what's possible. We know this requires bandwidth that is precious and limited. If your plan doesn't measure up, how soon would you like to know? The Hebets Company - Retirement Income Landscape Video Insurance services are provided through The Comp Consulting Companies, LLC.; a subsidiary of NFP Corp. (NFP). Doing business in Arizona as The Hebets Company (License #29172). Securities offered through Kestra Investment Services, LLC (Kestra IS), Member FINRA/SIPC. Investment advisory services may be offered through Kestra Advisory Services, LLC (Kestra AS), an affiliate of Kestra IS. Kestra IS and Kestra AS are not affiliated with The Hebets Company, NFP or its subsidiaries. Investor Disclosures: Federal tax laws are complex and subject to change. The information in this message is based on current interpretations of the law and is not guaranteed. Neither The Hebets Company nor its employees, its agents, brokers or registered representatives give tax or legal advice. You should consult an attorney or competent tax professional for answers to specific tax questions as they apply to your situation.
Gizmodo
22-07-2025
- Business
- Gizmodo
Meta Is Breaking OpenAI $100 Million at a Time
The artificial intelligence landscape, once characterized by collaborative innovation, has dramatically shifted into an all-out war for top talent. At the forefront of this aggressive new era stands Mark Zuckerberg's Meta Platforms, orchestrating an unprecedented assault on rival OpenAI. This isn't merely a recruitment drive; it's a clear declaration of war, fueled by a staggering $300 million offer designed to dismantle the very core of its competitor. The Wall Street Journal is reporting that Meta is dangling pay packages so extreme they fundamentally redefine the concept of a 'signing bonus.' For more than ten of OpenAI's most brilliant minds, the offer is a life-altering proposition, with up to $100 million paid out in the first year alone, potentially escalating to $300 million over four years. These are, quite literally, the most extreme financial incentives in tech history, crafted not merely to attract individuals, but to systematically weaken a rival. The ultimate goal: to poach the very minds behind groundbreaking AI systems like GPT (Generative Pre-trained Transformer, a type of large language model capable of understanding and generating human-like text) and accelerate Meta's ambitious dream of achieving artificial general intelligence (AGI), a level of AI capable of performing any intellectual task a human can. When contacted by Gizmodo, a Meta spokesperson referred to comments made last week by CEO Mark Zuckerberg during an interview with The Information. When asked if it was accurate that Meta was spending up to $100 million or $200 million on packages for recruits, Zuckerberg responded, 'So look, I mean, a lot of the specifics that have been reported aren't accurate by themselves. But it is a very hot market. I mean, as you know, and there's a small number of researchers, which are the best, who are in demand by all of the different labs. So I think that it certainly is quite competitive.' He further added, 'There's just an absolute premium for the best and most talented people.' OpenAI Reportedly Shuts Down for a Week as Zuck Poaches Its Top Talent The impact on OpenAI has been immediate and severe, leading to what many are now calling the '$300 Million Brain Drain.' As Gizmodo previously reported, OpenAI has been forced to hit the panic button internally, grappling with a significant exodus of its top researchers. The scale of Meta's poaching became so disruptive that, as Gizmodo also revealed, OpenAI reportedly had to shut down operations for an entire week. This drastic measure was taken to stem the bleeding and reorganize in the face of such aggressive talent acquisition. Key figures, the very architects of OpenAI's most advanced models, were suddenly faced with offers too lucrative to refuse, leaving gaping holes in the company's research and development teams. Now, the full extent of this pressure is clear: Zuckerberg isn't just luring away researchers; he is offering them generational wealth, fundamentally altering their financial futures. OpenAI Hits the Panic Button This aggressive maneuver suggests a coordinated power play aimed at hollowing out OpenAI from within. The Journal's report highlights that Meta is extending these jaw-dropping pay packages even as it struggles to fill the critical role of chief scientist within its own AI division. Despite months of outreach, the company still lacks a singular leader to spearhead its AGI ambitions. This hasn't, however, deterred Meta from attempting to acquire everyone else's top talent. This narrative transcends mere competitive hiring; it is a story of unprecedented escalation. Meta is striving to achieve superintelligence – machines that are smarter than humans and capable of outperforming human intelligence in virtually every field – by poaching the very individuals who built OpenAI's most advanced systems. The strategy appears to be to offer loyalty-level money without a clear leader or a fully defined plan, operating on the premise that if enough high-IQ individuals are gathered in one building, AGI will inevitably follow. And it might be working. The departures from OpenAI are far from over, and the internal mood has reportedly shifted from defiance to dread. OpenAI is bleeding talent at a pace that could fundamentally reshape the entire AI landscape. But Meta's aggressive maneuver raises a profound question for the future of artificial intelligence: Can you truly buy genius, or are you merely renting it? While Meta gains immediate access to unparalleled expertise and accelerates its own AI ambitions, the long-term implications are complex. The culture of a company, the synergy of its teams, and the organic development of groundbreaking ideas are not easily purchased. There's a significant risk that such extreme financial incentives, while effective in the short term, might inadvertently foster a mercenary environment rather than a truly innovative one. For Zuckerberg, this is a clear and strategic play to rapidly close the gap with OpenAI and Google in the fiercely competitive AI race. By siphoning off the very individuals responsible for the advancements that put OpenAI at the forefront, Meta aims to acquire not just talent, but invaluable institutional knowledge, proven methodologies, and perhaps even a piece of the intangible 'magic' that has driven OpenAI's success. Zuckerberg's strategy mirrors how startups often chase product-market fit: if one researcher doesn't get you there, maybe the next one will. If a chief scientist cannot be secured, perhaps the field can simply be outspent until one emerges. The underlying logic is simple: build the smartest team in the world, pay them more than anyone ever has, and task them with chasing god-level AI. However, building superintelligence is a vastly different endeavor from scaling a social media application, and Meta's spending spree comes with inherent risks. Throwing $100 million at an individual is not the same as cultivating a cohesive culture, establishing a unified vision, or developing a coordinated research roadmap. Without strong scientific leadership, the lab risks transforming into a gravity well of competing egos and conflicting agendas. For OpenAI, the stakes are nothing short of existential. This battle is not just about who builds the next groundbreaking AI model; it is about who will control the very future of artificial intelligence. A mere year ago, OpenAI stood as the undisputed leader in the field. Today, Meta is leveraging its immense financial power to systematically dismantle that lead. Zuckerberg has publicly stated his ambition for Meta to be the company that 'gets AGI right.' This vision, it appears, begins with owning the premier talent and, by extension, breaking the institution that first cultivated it.
