For some context here is my "artist statement" as a generative artist:
From the outside, art is regarded as highbrow, intellectual, and “human”. Automation, however, is often perceived as rote, boring, and “robotic” by those who are non-technical.
As an engineer by trade, I see the act of automation as a much more creative process than the public gives it credit for.
In my artistic practice I try to bridge that gap by using software to automate the generation of unique art pieces in less than a fraction of a second. My hope is to elicit the same kind of emotions and reactions that viewers feel when viewing art that has been “generated” by hand, and help them consider automation as an art form and an act of creativity.
Whether acting as an artist, or engineer, I like to think of automation as my artistic medium.
What happened to working on AI for the good of humanity, including AGI, and making sure it didn’t fall into the hands of bad actors? Wasn’t that the original aspiration? Now this reads like next generation Intercom/Olark tools.
It's pretty common. VC funds will run these checks on you, and most companies do as well when they even hire you. It's table stakes for any company committed to data security and safety.
I was commenting based on my experience that 1) VC firms actually do ask you for permission to run background checks on you, look you up online, and know a fair bit about you 2) We run background checks on everyone we hire, and its fairly easy to do, because I believe it would be irresponsible not to.
I don't think there is one real error here as you put it, but it's been made public he was warned about him before and people he worked with would refuse to go to his properties when invited and told him why (citation: https://medium.com/@EthanZ/on-me-and-the-media-lab-715bfc707...).
Thanks, I think this is what I was missing. Failing to google a donor is a pretty bad oversight, but I think attributable to basically negligence. Ignoring the advice of your peers is more egregious, which looks like what happened here.
"Due diligence research" makes it sound complicated. Just Google the guy. I always look up potential business partners. And, in the past, I have discovered evidence of criminal activity that puts me on alert (nothing like Epstein though, just run-of-the-mill fraud.)
Well, that's what's unclear to me — the apology makes it sound like he just had no idea about this guy. From the other comments, it sounds like that's false, and he ignored warnings from his peers, which makes more sense to me.
No need to be hostile, I'm just trying to understand the situation :)
Hey there, founder of Chargehound here, it's a slider so you can adjust it to 5 mins if you want.
Many companies do take up to 30 minutes especially if they are compiling a comprehensive portfolio (if the dispute is for thousands of dollars) and are outsourcing the representment.
I do some generative art [1] and I think a lot of the concerns in this article have to do with it being accepted by the art world vs consumers.
In my experience consumers enjoy generative art, and are happy to buy generative work so long as its in a medium they are used to - such a as a print or plot - and are not interested in moving/digital screens.
Instead of picking a render and placing it for sale, show the buyers the software, show them the parameters and give them an option between a few renders to choose from. It makes it way more personal. People and popular culture are also much more tech savvy now and appreciative of elements of digital/internet culture.
This is just my opinion, but I believe many generative artists seem to put the algorithmic focus ahead of the aesthetic. From my experience if you treat the aesthetic as the primary objective and the technology as a tool it resonates better. Jared Tarbell and Manoloide both seem to do this, but have very different styles, and are by far my favorites in the space.
How did you maintain compliance and security before you could have someone full time on it? How did you deal with audits? Did you hire an engineer full-time dedicated to this, outsource it, or do it yourself? (I ask because I do this now but at 8 people it's starting to take up too much of my time as CTO)
I think either of your options would work. If you have in-house skills (yourself and/or another engineer), exploit them. If you have a trusted third party who can help, spend some time and money on them. If neither of those work and you feel you need to hire someone, do that (although I’d go with the other two options first). Also, as you undertake these audits, keep a solid record of documentation (questions and answers) as most due dil exercises will be made up of many of the same questions. Stock answers go a long way.
You were down voted, but this is actually an internal talking point that FB uses to rally their current employees behind the company with.
Some of the points an FB employee said about the situation around a week ago: "Well the ISPs are worse" "Imagine if it was them instead of us, we do a better job" "Net Neutrality is the real problem".
They think of everything as a PR problem unfortunately, and would rather go this route than dealing with the problems they have.
Bloomberg makes all of their money from terminal and data services. In terms of the business model, the consumer news service is basically a vanity project, so I don't think they are that concerned with what newsfeed changes have done to them.
