So wage suppression is good because it’s better for the _collective_?

Wage suppression? Its the opposite were talking about here. Pay large amounts of money to make sure people don't work on challenging problems.

But sure you cant try and argue that's wage suppression.

▲

respondo2134 5 days ago | parent | next [-]

This is the Gavin Belson strategy to starve Pied Piper of distributed computing experts; nobody get's to work on his Signature Edition Box 3!

	▲	edm0nd 5 days ago \| parent [-]
		Fuck Banksy!

▲

chatmasta 5 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

The comment I was responding to was implying that it would be better for the collective if Meta was not paying these exorbitant salaries. You said “it [paying high salaries] is a great way to kneecap collective growth and development.”

In other words, you’re suggesting that _not_ paying high salaries would be good for collective growth and development.

And if Meta is currently willing to pay these salaries, but didn’t for some reason, that would be the definition of wage suppression.

	▲	jstgunderscore 4 days ago \| parent \| next [-]
		Wage suppression is anytime a worker makes less than the absolute maximum an employer is willing to pay? That would include just about everyone making a paycheck. Based on my cursory knowledge of the term, wage suppression here would be if FB manipulated external factors in the AI labor market so that their hire would accept a "lowball" offer.
	▲	albedoa 5 days ago \| parent \| prev \| next [-]
		Oh ya? If I am willing to pay my cleaner $350, but she only charges and accepted an offer of $200, I am engaging in the definition of wage suppression?
	▲	boringg 5 days ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		You gotta re-check your position. This is an extreme interpretation of wage suppression.

▲

5 days ago | parent | prev [-]

[deleted]