Why does docusign need such sophisticated and powerful AI models, to the point that they’re willing to risk their customers’ ire by training on their data (yes I know, even though it’s anonymized per “industry best practices”)? Are they in some additional line of business besides making it possible to sign a contract electronically?
The AI gods smile favorably upon worshipers that invoke them at the shrines of finance these days. They shower them with the same good fortunes that once came from the blockchain false gods.
Yes, and extending existing contracts based on new requirements.
But also contract validation, like check if something missing or finding loopholes. If they are sneaky, they could sell that information to lawyers, who can definitely make use of it.
I'm not inherently pro-AI, but there are indeed valid and interesting use cases for such models, if the data can be anonymized correctly. And I'm not sure if it makes sense to single out DocuSign, because there are probably many companies which train their models on similar data.
I find this comment interesting in the context of having read a lot of brain-dead takes on "capitalism", some of which it liken it to feudalism.
I find it interesting because it shows how different those two are.
Under feudal zero-sum world your question would make complete sense, but under a capitalist positive-sum world, it seems to me the answer is just "a lot of profit would be left on the table" (ie positive-sum mutual-benefit transactions), which explains why docusign would do it.
I feel so small when a company that... does documenting signing... already has investors thinking it's worth $11b (down from over $50b when many were convinced touching a piece of paper was a common covid vector of transmission...)
It’s not a “need” but they are just riding the coat tails of “AI”. Probably getting a fat check in b2b by selling to OpenAI or many of the VC funded AI companies.
Throw in any AI into a company and the vulture capitalists will load you up on cheap money
I had a teacher who promulgated the same technique for what we called Calc III (similar to a proofs class, I imagine; Spiwak was the text). It was very effective.
> Rite Aid is currently going through bankruptcy proceedings and the order will go into effect after approval from the bankruptcy court and the federal district court…
I dunno, it seems like the judgement is sound to me. I’d place that error on the offending party, not the enforcing body. Company clearly wasn’t paying attention to the books nor the harm their use of technology was causing, and thus got their just rewards for that behavior. “Talking about screwing up twice” seems like a more accurate statement.
> The same Latin root is found in more familiar words such as acceleration and even celebrity, a word used when fame comes quickly.
According to the OED, celebrity comes from the Latin “celebritās, [the] state of being busy or crowded, festival, games or other celebration characterized by crowded conditions, reputation, renown, fame, frequency or commonness.”
> From Proto-Italic kelizris, perhaps root cognate with clueo, from Proto-Indo-European ḱlew-; alternatively (if the rare meaning of "swift, in rapid succession" is to be taken as primary) connected with celer (with Greek κέλλω from a root *kel-). Jackson An Etymological Dictionary of the Latin Language (1828:77).
As far as I can tell, the entire premise of this article is based on a model, not any empirical measurement of Manhattan actually sinking. The article then tries to distract us from examining its thin thesis too critically by connecting it to the effects of climate change. Besides, isn’t lower Manhattan made of bedrock, not sand?
This is not correct. The sinking is measured, not modeled.
As usual, ignore the article and go straight to the actual paper.[0]
"Geodetic measurements show a mean subsidence rate of 1–2 mm/year across the city that is consistent with regional post-glacial deformation, though we find some areas of significantly greater subsidence rates."
"Much of lower Manhattan lies between 1 and 2 m in elevation above sea level, and measured subsidence from Global Positioning System (GPS) there is 2.1 mm/year (Boretti, 2021)."
Maybe it sounds conspiratorial but if such schemes were available, I believe Harvard is too well connected to be subject to such scrutiny by those with the power to do such an audit.
The idea that people tossing around hundreds of millions of dollars are on the up and up otherwise they would have consequences doesn't seem to have much historical evidence supporting this dynamic
The Paradise papers leak outlined a lot of these schemes
The whole value proposition of a contractor is that you can onboard them quickly when you need to augment your existing staff, and can terminate them just as fast when they’re no longer needed. This is in no way a layoff or mass firing, it’s a standard contract termination that occurs all the time with tech companies.
The “previously assured jobs were safe” claim is ungrounded in the article, which lamely provides little more than an anonymous source mentioning an unnamed Apple employee: “One of the contractors reportedly said that Apple previously assured the workers that their jobs were safe.”
SBF’s plea deal can’t be far behind. He is uniquely positioned to help FTX’s receivers recover the maximum amount of money, and will use that leverage to strike the best deal possible. The whole FTX crew will likely pay their debt to society and be free before they’re 40 with the potential to do something useful with their skills and knowledge (think Mitnick).
What I love most is that the new CEO of Twitter is front and center making a major product and pricing announcement to the entire customer base within 4 days of buying the company. That’s awesome execution, baby! Not to mention the best type of product marketing imaginable.
Interesting point! What may be an effective management style for running a company you own could be deleterious when running a country for which you are an elected official.
