Always welcome more optionality in the opportunity space!
Suggestion: Potential Improvement in Narrative Signalling by lowering the range of RAs to hire (thus increasing pay):
If I were applying to this, I’d feel confused and slightly underappreciated if I had the right set of ML/Software Engineering skills but to be barely paid subsistence level for my full-time work (in NY).
It seems like the funding amount is well corresponded to how much the grant is. I am rather naive when it comes to how much ML/engineering talent should be paid in pursuit of alignment goals. But it seems like $70k spread across 4 people at full-time (for half year each) is only slightly above minimal wage in many places.
Comparisons: At 35k a year, it seems it might be considerably lower than industry equivalent even when compared to other programs
Ex: Lightcone has a general policy of paying ~70% market pay for equivalent talent.
Recalling from memory of LTFF/similar grants that experienced researchers were granted 70k ~ 200k for their individual research.
A quick glance at 80k job-board for RAs nets me a range of 32,332 ~ 87,000.
Of course… money is tight: The grant constraint is well acknowledged here. But potentially the number of RAs expected to hire can be further down adjusted as while potentially increasing the submission rate of the candidates that truly fits the requirement of the research program.
Hiring more might not work as intended: Also, it might come as a surprise that fewer people to manage will turn out to be a blessing rather than a curse—hiring one’s way out of something is tempting but should usually be tempered with caution.
Thing I might have got wrong:
The intended audiences and people of the right skill-set will not be in countries where the salary is barely above subsistence level.
The Research Project has decided that people who possesses an instinct for “I’d like to work here, but please give me X because I think I am worth that much and can offer at least that much value” is generally a poor fit for the project.
A misunderstanding the salary distribution and the rate of deterioration of the current financial climate within the scene.
Hey Winston, thanks for writing this out. This is something we talked a lot about internally. Here are a few thoughts:
Comparisons: At 35k a year, it seems it might be considerably lower than industry equivalent even when compared to other programs
I think the more relevant comparison is academia, not industry. In academia, $35k is (unfortunately) well within in the normal range for RAs and PhD students. This is especially true outside the US, where wages are easily 2x − 4x lower.
Often academics justify this on the grounds that you’re receiving more than just monetary benefits: you’re receiving mentorship and training. We think the same will be true for these positions.
The actual reason is that you have to be somewhat crazy to even want to go into research. We’re looking for somewhat crazy.
If I were applying to this, I’d feel confused and slightly underappreciated if I had the right set of ML/Software Engineering skills but to be barely paid subsistence level for my full-time work (in NY).
If it helps, we’re paying ourselves even less. As much as we’d like to pay the RAs (and ourselves) more, we have to work with what we have.
Of course… money is tight: The grant constraint is well acknowledged here. But potentially the number of RAs expected to hire can be further down adjusted as while potentially increasing the submission rate of the candidates that truly fits the requirement of the research program.
For exceptional talent, we’re willing to pay higher wages.
The important thing is that both funding and open positions are exceptionally scarce. We expect there to be enough strong candidates who are willing to take the pay cut.
All in all, we’re expecting most of our hires to come from outside the US where the cost of living is substantially lower. If lower wages are a deal-breaker for anyone but you’re still interested in this kind of work, please flag this in the form. The application should be low-effort enough that it’s still worth applying.
Often academics justify this on the grounds that you’re receiving more than just monetary benefits: you’re receiving mentorship and training. We think the same will be true for these positions.
I don’t buy this. I’m actually going through the process of getting a PhD at ~40k USD per year, and one of the main reasons why I’m sticking with it is that after that, I have a solid credential that’s recognized worldwide, backed by a recognizable name (i.e. my university and my supervisor). You can’t provide either of those things.
This offer seems to take the worst of both worlds between academia and industry, but if you actually find someone good at this rate, good for you I suppose
Always welcome more optionality in the opportunity space!
Suggestion: Potential Improvement in Narrative Signalling by lowering the range of RAs to hire (thus increasing pay):
If I were applying to this, I’d feel confused and slightly underappreciated if I had the right set of ML/Software Engineering skills but to be barely paid subsistence level for my full-time work (in NY).
It seems like the funding amount is well corresponded to how much the grant is. I am rather naive when it comes to how much ML/engineering talent should be paid in pursuit of alignment goals. But it seems like $70k spread across 4 people at full-time (for half year each) is only slightly above minimal wage in many places.
Comparisons: At 35k a year, it seems it might be considerably lower than industry equivalent even when compared to other programs
Ex: Lightcone has a general policy of paying ~70% market pay for equivalent talent.
Recalling from memory of LTFF/similar grants that experienced researchers were granted 70k ~ 200k for their individual research.
A quick glance at 80k job-board for RAs nets me a range of 32,332 ~ 87,000.
Of course… money is tight: The grant constraint is well acknowledged here. But potentially the number of RAs expected to hire can be further down adjusted as while potentially increasing the submission rate of the candidates that truly fits the requirement of the research program.
Hiring more might not work as intended: Also, it might come as a surprise that fewer people to manage will turn out to be a blessing rather than a curse—hiring one’s way out of something is tempting but should usually be tempered with caution.
Thing I might have got wrong:
The intended audiences and people of the right skill-set will not be in countries where the salary is barely above subsistence level.
The Research Project has decided that people who possesses an instinct for “I’d like to work here, but please give me X because I think I am worth that much and can offer at least that much value” is generally a poor fit for the project.
A misunderstanding the salary distribution and the rate of deterioration of the current financial climate within the scene.
Overall, I am glad y’all exist! Good luck :)
Hey Winston, thanks for writing this out. This is something we talked a lot about internally. Here are a few thoughts:
I think the more relevant comparison is academia, not industry. In academia, $35k is (unfortunately) well within in the normal range for RAs and PhD students. This is especially true outside the US, where wages are easily 2x − 4x lower.
Often academics justify this on the grounds that you’re receiving more than just monetary benefits: you’re receiving mentorship and training. We think the same will be true for these positions.
The actual reason is that you have to be somewhat crazy to even want to go into research. We’re looking for somewhat crazy.
If it helps, we’re paying ourselves even less. As much as we’d like to pay the RAs (and ourselves) more, we have to work with what we have.
For exceptional talent, we’re willing to pay higher wages.
The important thing is that both funding and open positions are exceptionally scarce. We expect there to be enough strong candidates who are willing to take the pay cut.
All in all, we’re expecting most of our hires to come from outside the US where the cost of living is substantially lower. If lower wages are a deal-breaker for anyone but you’re still interested in this kind of work, please flag this in the form. The application should be low-effort enough that it’s still worth applying.
I don’t buy this. I’m actually going through the process of getting a PhD at ~40k USD per year, and one of the main reasons why I’m sticking with it is that after that, I have a solid credential that’s recognized worldwide, backed by a recognizable name (i.e. my university and my supervisor). You can’t provide either of those things.
This offer seems to take the worst of both worlds between academia and industry, but if you actually find someone good at this rate, good for you I suppose