Am I reading this wrong? https://www.reuters.com/business/sa...-million-bonuses-openai-employees-2025-06-18/
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Meta offering top engineers bonuses of $100 Million? (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Joe Bryant
- Start date
Uruk-Hai
Footballguy
rockaction
Footballguy
I think that's right. Just read about it this week in the Atlantic. They're poaching men and women from Open AI, but like Ilov80s points out, Sam Altman is problematic. He got fired from his own company for what his partners felt had been a violation of their mission. When the partners changed their mind, it was no longer tenable for them to stay there and they left.
It's been a very weird saga. They tried to change their status from some form of non-profit to either a less-stepped up version or a for-profit, and everybody rebelled because they would have gotten all those tax breaks to become a for-profit company. It's been really sketchy, and I gather that this is the company that is supposed to be saving us from the nefarious ends to which AI might be put.
And the p(doom) seems to be increasing among those in the know, with a pretty frightening estimate some gave of AGI (average general intelligence) and ASI (average superintelligence) by the year 2030 at latest. We ain't ready. Damn I hope this goes like Y2K. I really do.
eta* Here's The Atlantic, which is partnering with AI, mentioning the poaching after talking about the skeptics and the adherents of AI:
"The extreme rhetoric is accompanied by extreme spending. The tech industry has collectively burned through hundreds of billions of dollars since the arrival of ChatGPT to train more powerful AI systems and build the physical infrastructure they require, and it shows no signs of stopping.In recent weeks, Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg, apparently desperate to catch up in the AI race, has been on a recruiting spree in which he has reportedly offered nine-figure packages to top researchers. (Meta says that the numbers have been exaggerated or misrepresented.) Exactly how generative AI will make a profit is not at all clear, but tech companies seem to have faith that the money will flow once the technology has completely rewired the world. As for the skeptics: 'When the AI bubble bursts, I don’t think the tech industry is ready for how many people are going to take genuine pleasure in it,' Zitron wrote last week."
eta2* Here is Wired's report.
eta3* More Wired on the discrepancy between Altman's story and Zuckerberg's
"The Meta CEO has also been personally reaching out to potential recruits, according to The Wall Street Journal. 'Over the past month, Meta has been aggressively building out their new AI effort, and has repeatedly (and mostly unsuccessfully) tried to recruit some of our strongest talent with comp-focused packages,' [Mark] Chen [Chief research officer at Open AI] wrote on Slack. A source close to the efforts at Meta confirmed the company has been significantly ramping up its research recruiting, with a particular eye toward talent from OpenAI and Google. Anthropic, while also a top rival, is thought to be less of a culture fit at Meta, one source tells WIRED. 'They haven’t necessarily expanded the band, but for top talent, the sky is the limit,' the source says."
It's been a very weird saga. They tried to change their status from some form of non-profit to either a less-stepped up version or a for-profit, and everybody rebelled because they would have gotten all those tax breaks to become a for-profit company. It's been really sketchy, and I gather that this is the company that is supposed to be saving us from the nefarious ends to which AI might be put.
And the p(doom) seems to be increasing among those in the know, with a pretty frightening estimate some gave of AGI (average general intelligence) and ASI (average superintelligence) by the year 2030 at latest. We ain't ready. Damn I hope this goes like Y2K. I really do.
eta* Here's The Atlantic, which is partnering with AI, mentioning the poaching after talking about the skeptics and the adherents of AI:
"The extreme rhetoric is accompanied by extreme spending. The tech industry has collectively burned through hundreds of billions of dollars since the arrival of ChatGPT to train more powerful AI systems and build the physical infrastructure they require, and it shows no signs of stopping.In recent weeks, Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg, apparently desperate to catch up in the AI race, has been on a recruiting spree in which he has reportedly offered nine-figure packages to top researchers. (Meta says that the numbers have been exaggerated or misrepresented.) Exactly how generative AI will make a profit is not at all clear, but tech companies seem to have faith that the money will flow once the technology has completely rewired the world. As for the skeptics: 'When the AI bubble bursts, I don’t think the tech industry is ready for how many people are going to take genuine pleasure in it,' Zitron wrote last week."
eta2* Here is Wired's report.
eta3* More Wired on the discrepancy between Altman's story and Zuckerberg's
"The Meta CEO has also been personally reaching out to potential recruits, according to The Wall Street Journal. 'Over the past month, Meta has been aggressively building out their new AI effort, and has repeatedly (and mostly unsuccessfully) tried to recruit some of our strongest talent with comp-focused packages,' [Mark] Chen [Chief research officer at Open AI] wrote on Slack. A source close to the efforts at Meta confirmed the company has been significantly ramping up its research recruiting, with a particular eye toward talent from OpenAI and Google. Anthropic, while also a top rival, is thought to be less of a culture fit at Meta, one source tells WIRED. 'They haven’t necessarily expanded the band, but for top talent, the sky is the limit,' the source says."
Last edited:
KarmaPolice
Footballguy
I keep reading 2-3 years for estimates. Agree, we are not ready. Scary stuff, imo - especially taking into account what some of the people involved believe.
rockaction
Footballguy
Yes, 2027, but the guys who predicted that have been about a year off. Scott Alexander of Slate Star Codex platformed a dude that thought it was 2028 latest and he's apparently been the most accurate guy in predicting benchmarks for this stuff.
I have some thoughts about it that were clearer a couple weeks ago but I'm not sure what I think as of now. Part of me wants to agree with the people that say it'll actually never be a facsimile of human intelligence because it's all probability and computation, and I have thoughts about that but I'm wavering back and forth.
I think that there's quite the possibility that there is a real God or creator and that we're never going to come close to modeling the human brain (never mind if we actually have a soul), so I haven't built the bunker yet. I've noticed that most of the guys doing this are all atheist agnostic and that they believe that it's physical matter that is the first cause of things. That's a very big difference than understanding (or likely misunderstanding) the workings of something that has a first cause we can never comprehend—or a flawed first cause.
And then that last part wrecks me because what if we create a Frankenstein from a flawed understanding of what we are when we were never supposed to understand how it all worked and we destroy ourselves that way? That would be tragic, but we're tragic beings at heart.
So . . . anybody want bacon and eggs?
eta* And I was just reading Thomas Szasz, famous libertarian thinker, who was saying that thinking we understand the brain and mental processes requires that we accept the scientific materialist, or naturalist, way of understanding the world as a function of physical processes only, so I don't think I'm far off in my assessment. The hours see me swing from one side to another, but that is because the risk is so great even if we cannot replicate a brain could we create something dangerous anyway? Ugh.
Man, I hope there's a God.
Last edited:
Harry Frogfish
Footballguy
LOL @ the Y2K comp. I mean, I wish, I really do, but this isn't George Washington crossing the Delaware.
This is a bullet train.
This is a bullet train.
tommyGunZ
Footballguy
Which part are you unsure about Joe?
rockaction
Footballguy
Yeah, I get it. Sounds funny. It's almost totally different, but it is one of the p(doom) computer scenarios where we came up roses. I'm praying. I'm not sanguine at all. I understood that one and didn't see irreversible doom and panic ensuing. All you'd have to do is re-program and chill out a bit. This isn't reversible and we're abdicating control of some completely fundamental advantages and things.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
) - I often find their discussions interesting and informative. This week’s discussion especially so.
That they'd actually pay engineers $100 million signing bonuses.
Hawks64
Footballguy
Software engineering =/= to AI engineering, and to poach AI talent from competitors, you will need to pay a king's ransom.
KarmaPolice
Footballguy
That's tells us the stakes and money involved to the company and people who get there first. Will that give us our first trillionaire?
To piggyback on the other thread and what rock and I keep hearing about as far as it being only 2-3 years away possibly. Companies probably see that as several hundred million $ investment to possibly unlock the grand prize.
Of course. I don't think anyone is saying software engineers are the same as AI engineers.
Does $100 million as a signing bonus to an engineer not sound remarkable?
Are other companies doing that?
Hawks64
Footballguy
Meta is aggressively pursuing top AI talent, and attracting these individuals—especially from competitors—comes at a steep cost. These aren't just engineers; they are elite, high-demand experts in artificial intelligence, often with backgrounds in data science and leadership. In many cases, it's more accurate to compare them to CEOs than to traditional engineers. Recruiting them is less about filling a technical role and more about bringing in visionary leaders who can shape the future of AI.
Other companies aren't because, outside of Apple, they aren't where Meta is in the field of AI.
Terminalxylem
Footballguy
That's a lot of money, but more power to them.
It's gonna be worthless once AGI decides to rid itself of the parasite though.
It's gonna be worthless once AGI decides to rid itself of the parasite though.
TennesseeJed
Footballguy
TennesseeJed
Footballguy
Of course, this is probably better in the AI thread - because that’s what we are talking about. We are not talking about random engineers.
Sparky Polastri
Footballguy
What are the meaningful differences?
djmich
Footballguy
One gets paid $100M signing bonuses, the others don't.
Of course. I don’t think anyone thinks someone that can earn a $100 million signing bonus is a random engineer.
I was just surprised by the amount of money.
uwillbsoon
Footballguy
100 million investment will get Facebook a lot more money than Patrick Mahomes will make the Chiefs. If they get them anywhere near super intelligence
My guess is these are also some type of stock option or something else that vests over time, too. And, of course, this is coming from a competitor. So who knows if it's accurate.
If you think about the Instagram acquisition, that was in this same range. I think they paid over a billion for a company with 13 employees. That worked out.
This isn't unusual for Zuck at all.
My guess is these are also some type of stock option or something else that vests over time, too. And, of course, this is coming from a competitor. So who knows if it's accurate.
If you think about the Instagram acquisition, that was in this same range. I think they paid over a billion for a company with 13 employees. That worked out.
This isn't unusual for Zuck at all.
Sand
Footballguy
Hey Meta, random engineer here!
tommyGunZ
Footballguy
It’s a grip for sure.
And thought provoking, on many levels. i know you do a lot of charitable work Joe. It’s hard for me to believe we can’t do more to help those in need when people are getting $100M bonuses. But I digress.
SpurrierisisGod
Footballguy
Chatgpt please create a resume for me that convinces a company that i am worthy of a $100 million signing bonus as an AI Engineer. Don't make it overly complicated with technical terms so I can still understand it. Include talking points that a high school senior could possibly talk about if randomly asked by the interviewer. Avoid misspellings.
⚡DEADHEAD⚡
Footballguy
It's a giant bet, partly defensive, partly offensive. Not sure what the market will bring? Hire the talent to make it harder for the competition to excel and pass you while you figure it out. Certain that AI is the equivalent of what the Internet was in the 1990s? Hire the top talent, regardless of the cost, so you can ensure a spot near, if not at, the top.
Want to take advantage? Buy power companies figuring out how to support the demand.
And keep an eye on quantum.
Want to take advantage? Buy power companies figuring out how to support the demand.
And keep an eye on quantum.
MTskibum
Footballguy
Zuck also wasted 20 billion on 2nd life, err I mean metaverse.
It could be he doesnt know what he is doing and is just throwing money at trends.
edit: I was way off, it was 46 billion
Last edited:
rockaction
Footballguy
Zuck also wasted 20 billion on 2nd life, err I mean metaverse.
It could be he doesnt know what he is doing and is just throwing money at trends.
edit: I was way off, it was 46 billion
In fairness to @uwillbsoon he did not say Zuckerberg was necessarily wise. He said "This isn't unusual for Zuck at all." One need not entail the other.
I'm not sure about the numbers behind the Chiefs claim. Everyone's mileage may vary on that claim. I'd say given how transformative people are saying superintelligence is that he's probably right about that claim if it's limited to a comparison between the two, which it seems to be.
Although if MFDOOM ((I kid, [p(doom), I mean])) happens, what good is the money to him, anyway? Why the rush, Zuck?
As far as MFDOOM goes, RIP. Diabetes is a silent killer. He was in his fifties, too.
Born alone die alone no matter what your plans is
hope he lived long enough to tell it to his grandkids - MFDOOM as King Geedorah
Last edited:
uwillbsoon
Footballguy
No doubt. Zuck is a king at falling behind and buying his way to number 1.
Zuck also wasted 20 billion on 2nd life, err I mean metaverse.
It could be he doesnt know what he is doing and is just throwing money at trends.
edit: I was way off, it was 46 billion
He's not all that innovative. But he's seemingly pretty great at catching up. And that usually involves vast sums of money.
Fun poll here for Zuckerburg https://forums.footballguys.com/thr...rg-in-effectiveness-leading-a-company.816625/
Sparky Polastri
Footballguy
Not a whole lot different from Jobs if we're being honest. Both had quasi visions that others didn't take the time to jump into. They were first to market with the concepts generally speaking then played catch up with the others who had followed shortly after. Zuck was probably a bit more of a pirate at the beginning than Jobs.No doubt. Zuck is a king at falling behind and buying his way to number 1.
Zuck also wasted 20 billion on 2nd life, err I mean metaverse.
It could be he doesnt know what he is doing and is just throwing money at trends.
edit: I was way off, it was 46 billion
He's not all that innovative. But he's seemingly pretty great at catching up. And that usually involves vast sums of money.
uwillbsoon
Footballguy
Was Facebook first? MySpace was years ahead of them?Not a whole lot different from Jobs if we're being honest. Both had quasi visions that others didn't take the time to jump into. They were first to market with the concepts generally speaking then played catch up with the others who had followed shortly after. Zuck was probably a bit more of a pirate at the beginning than Jobs.No doubt. Zuck is a king at falling behind and buying his way to number 1.
Zuck also wasted 20 billion on 2nd life, err I mean metaverse.
It could be he doesnt know what he is doing and is just throwing money at trends.
edit: I was way off, it was 46 billion
He's not all that innovative. But he's seemingly pretty great at catching up. And that usually involves vast sums of money.
St. Louis Bob
Footballguy
I know where the caboose goes.
Sparky Polastri
Footballguy
There were list servers and all that stuff before FB too, just like there were computers before Macs. This is why I went the "quasi vision" route. Neither was a brand new revelation or look, but both were a much more focused and intentional.Was Facebook first? MySpace was years ahead of them?Not a whole lot different from Jobs if we're being honest. Both had quasi visions that others didn't take the time to jump into. They were first to market with the concepts generally speaking then played catch up with the others who had followed shortly after. Zuck was probably a bit more of a pirate at the beginning than Jobs.No doubt. Zuck is a king at falling behind and buying his way to number 1.
Zuck also wasted 20 billion on 2nd life, err I mean metaverse.
It could be he doesnt know what he is doing and is just throwing money at trends.
edit: I was way off, it was 46 billion
He's not all that innovative. But he's seemingly pretty great at catching up. And that usually involves vast sums of money.
BlackCrowes
Footballguy
Talk with Meta engineers weekly. I’ll be curious what they think.
bagger
Footballguy
When you asked if he was an effective leader, this thread is why I voted no.
If you are running a company and you have to overpay people massively to keep up, that’s not a good firm or culture.
Unless you can convince me the one person paid $100M had knowledge no other person in the world did (which I would be incredulous about) this is terrible leadership and culture at a firm.
Terminalxylem
Footballguy
Maybe that’s what the market commands, just like elite athletes and A-list entertainers?
TennesseeJed
Footballguy
In this case the bonuses are being offered to a rare group of people who probably number less than 10 in the world who have knowledge and skills capable of making a business worth billions.
TennesseeJed
Footballguy
And, it should be added - if Meta can hire them, it would weaken competitors - when the expectation is there will ultimately be only one winner. Not sure I buy that - but that is what Zuckerberg is betting on.
This is a space where competition is fierce and changes almost daily.
This is a space where competition is fierce and changes almost daily.
I'm not convinced that the talent gap between these folks and the next few hundred best AI researchers/engineers in the world is big enough (or measurable enough) to justify what he's paying them. With athletes we're able to precisely measure performance. In this case, it's pretty tough to know who might build the next breakthrough AI innovation if they're in the right situation.
Thanks. Would like to hear how they see it.
Harry Frogfish
Footballguy
Comparing it to athletics is apropos, in a way, but laughable in reality. The comparison rings true on where our society exists. But where values stand? That is the scary part.
It's a rat race and it if it ends well I'll be surprised. Said it before but it's not just the train that has left the station or the horse leaving the barn. This is a bullet train and nothing is stopping it.
Tell us who you think can take this unavoidable hyper-change, and do it in a manner that benefits society as a whole? Like, with morals? And be able to hold that intact? Only chance is a mountain of a man, or two, that can somehow get a message through.
In the face of so much money and opportunity on the other side? Doubt it. Things are going super sonic. And no matter how great your town or city is, you won't be stopping it.
God I hope I'm wrong.
It's a rat race and it if it ends well I'll be surprised. Said it before but it's not just the train that has left the station or the horse leaving the barn. This is a bullet train and nothing is stopping it.
Tell us who you think can take this unavoidable hyper-change, and do it in a manner that benefits society as a whole? Like, with morals? And be able to hold that intact? Only chance is a mountain of a man, or two, that can somehow get a message through.
In the face of so much money and opportunity on the other side? Doubt it. Things are going super sonic. And no matter how great your town or city is, you won't be stopping it.
God I hope I'm wrong.
bagger
Footballguy
Yeah not sure I buy that.
bagger
Footballguy
You’re going to have to convince me Eugene the engineer is as impactful as Shohei Otani.
TennesseeJed
Footballguy
Meta is not offering that kind of bonus to Eugene the engineer.
TennesseeJed
Footballguy
As per usual with these types of threads - the hype out paces the facts by a distant margin:
Meta’s CTO Andrew Bosworth implied that only a few people for very senior leadership roles may have been offered that kind of money, but clarified “the actual terms of the offer” wasn’t a “sign-on bonus. It’s all these different things.” In other words, not an instant chunk of cash. Tech companies typically offer the biggest chunks of their pay to senior leaders in restricted stock unit (RSU) grants, dependent on either tenure or performance metrics.
A four-year total pay package worth about $100 million for a very senior leader is not inconceivable for Meta. Most of Meta’s named officers, including Bosworth, have earned total compensation of between $20 million and nearly $24 million per year for years.
Altman was “suggesting that we’re doing this for every single person,” Bosworth reportedly said at the meeting. “Look, you guys, the market’s hot. It’s not that hot.” (Meta did not immediately respond to our request for comment.)
Meta’s CTO Andrew Bosworth implied that only a few people for very senior leadership roles may have been offered that kind of money, but clarified “the actual terms of the offer” wasn’t a “sign-on bonus. It’s all these different things.” In other words, not an instant chunk of cash. Tech companies typically offer the biggest chunks of their pay to senior leaders in restricted stock unit (RSU) grants, dependent on either tenure or performance metrics.
A four-year total pay package worth about $100 million for a very senior leader is not inconceivable for Meta. Most of Meta’s named officers, including Bosworth, have earned total compensation of between $20 million and nearly $24 million per year for years.
Altman was “suggesting that we’re doing this for every single person,” Bosworth reportedly said at the meeting. “Look, you guys, the market’s hot. It’s not that hot.” (Meta did not immediately respond to our request for comment.)
Los Angelos Dodgers team valuation: $6.9 billion
FB Valuation: $1.8 trillion
Eugene may offer way more value to society, for good or bad, than a mere baseball player.