Federico
@federicovaggi.bsky.social
F_vaggi on Twitter. Senior staff scientist at Google X, previously Amazon.
I honestly think Spencer Cox has articulated this point better than most - a reasonable goal for people is to have a positive impact in their own local community. Granted, it's much easier for someone that is credibly on the right to make this point.
November 30, 2025 at 7:14 PM
I honestly think Spencer Cox has articulated this point better than most - a reasonable goal for people is to have a positive impact in their own local community. Granted, it's much easier for someone that is credibly on the right to make this point.
The first point in particular is virtually impossible to meet because that bar keeps getting higher - in part due to advertising, in part because due to social media, people end up with a completely skewed sense of who their peer group is.
November 30, 2025 at 7:11 PM
The first point in particular is virtually impossible to meet because that bar keeps getting higher - in part due to advertising, in part because due to social media, people end up with a completely skewed sense of who their peer group is.
Damn Summers pivoted quickly from his cancellation
November 26, 2025 at 2:33 AM
Damn Summers pivoted quickly from his cancellation
A) It's not the average candidate, it's the highest score by a human, and they've had some pretty impressive people join them B) It's a 2 hour problem.
All in all, it's pretty impressive, although I question to what extent the problem is something the model has been trained on.
All in all, it's pretty impressive, although I question to what extent the problem is something the model has been trained on.
November 25, 2025 at 5:26 PM
A) It's not the average candidate, it's the highest score by a human, and they've had some pretty impressive people join them B) It's a 2 hour problem.
All in all, it's pretty impressive, although I question to what extent the problem is something the model has been trained on.
All in all, it's pretty impressive, although I question to what extent the problem is something the model has been trained on.
That’s the Straussian reading of Albion’s Seed
November 24, 2025 at 5:05 PM
That’s the Straussian reading of Albion’s Seed
I don't think de Boer has any kind of expertise in genetics or statistics beyond an educated layman though right? He mostly studied test assessment I thought? and Harden is amazing and I love her writing, but, she is (understandably) extremely heavy handed in caveating her views.
November 24, 2025 at 1:25 AM
I don't think de Boer has any kind of expertise in genetics or statistics beyond an educated layman though right? He mostly studied test assessment I thought? and Harden is amazing and I love her writing, but, she is (understandably) extremely heavy handed in caveating her views.
Usually it's not "outright making shit up" but when you dig into things there's selectively choosing what to cite, isolated demands of rigor for studies that reach conclusions you dislike vs those you like, and so on.
November 23, 2025 at 6:35 PM
Usually it's not "outright making shit up" but when you dig into things there's selectively choosing what to cite, isolated demands of rigor for studies that reach conclusions you dislike vs those you like, and so on.
This isn't my area of expertise, but, one thing I find discouraging is that I can predict exactly what people's conclusions will be on this topic by their political orientation. This makes it exhausting to actually try to figure out what's going on.
November 23, 2025 at 6:34 PM
This isn't my area of expertise, but, one thing I find discouraging is that I can predict exactly what people's conclusions will be on this topic by their political orientation. This makes it exhausting to actually try to figure out what's going on.
I think it’s relative loss of status, which is made more salient by social media but also it’s a (very positive) fact.
November 21, 2025 at 1:09 AM
I think it’s relative loss of status, which is made more salient by social media but also it’s a (very positive) fact.
Reposted by Federico
Mentioning the amount of grant money you have won in a way that makes the department chair happy without coming across too blatantly as bragging that you piss off the other professors in audience.
November 21, 2025 at 12:25 AM
Mentioning the amount of grant money you have won in a way that makes the department chair happy without coming across too blatantly as bragging that you piss off the other professors in audience.
Mentioning the amount of grant money you have won in a way that makes the department chair happy without coming across too blatantly as bragging that you piss off the other professors in audience.
November 21, 2025 at 12:25 AM
Mentioning the amount of grant money you have won in a way that makes the department chair happy without coming across too blatantly as bragging that you piss off the other professors in audience.
Didn’t think it was possible but found another criticism dumber than “they are using all our water”.
November 19, 2025 at 2:39 PM
Didn’t think it was possible but found another criticism dumber than “they are using all our water”.
Only video recordings of her events and I wasn’t impressed, maybe the energy live is different though.
November 17, 2025 at 9:28 PM
Only video recordings of her events and I wasn’t impressed, maybe the energy live is different though.
Don’t take this as an ideological endorsement but Tony Blair is definitely more charismatic than Elizabeth Warren who has the single safest senate seat in the U.S. basically
November 17, 2025 at 8:08 PM
Don’t take this as an ideological endorsement but Tony Blair is definitely more charismatic than Elizabeth Warren who has the single safest senate seat in the U.S. basically
It also makes it very easy to deflect any criticism legitimate or not, by painting it as "The Establishment" trying to crush people that are out to truly upset "The System". In practice this means that ideology and quality end up (not perfectly) correlated.
November 12, 2025 at 4:31 PM
It also makes it very easy to deflect any criticism legitimate or not, by painting it as "The Establishment" trying to crush people that are out to truly upset "The System". In practice this means that ideology and quality end up (not perfectly) correlated.
Primary voters are upset at the status quo and are willing to overlook a lot of flaws if the candidate seems "like a fighter" or rails against the system/the establishment. This means that if you are a shitty candidate, it makes a ton of sense to position yourself as a populist left wing fighter.
November 12, 2025 at 4:29 PM
Primary voters are upset at the status quo and are willing to overlook a lot of flaws if the candidate seems "like a fighter" or rails against the system/the establishment. This means that if you are a shitty candidate, it makes a ton of sense to position yourself as a populist left wing fighter.
That is genuinely egregious. In a very narrow technical sense it is quite impressive because teaching the model such falsehoods without making it completely stupid isn’t trivial.
November 12, 2025 at 3:15 AM
That is genuinely egregious. In a very narrow technical sense it is quite impressive because teaching the model such falsehoods without making it completely stupid isn’t trivial.
I think the sad truth is that a lot of tech companies have level pyramids and promo processes that implicitly assumed a certain growth rate, and, once that goes away, you tend to grow your middle management layers far beyond what you can support.
November 11, 2025 at 1:52 AM
I think the sad truth is that a lot of tech companies have level pyramids and promo processes that implicitly assumed a certain growth rate, and, once that goes away, you tend to grow your middle management layers far beyond what you can support.
I don't want to both-sides here (the right is clearly worse) - but - I got extremely annoyed that this essay went viral here among very smart left wing types, in spite of outright making shit up bsky.app/profile/fede...
Like this is a pretty egregious misreading of what Brooks actually wrote, it’s just that Brooks is a useful synedoche for “hopelessly naive centrist idiot with stupid ideas” that a humanities prof can feel justified in the kind of misreading an undergrad would be failed for in a first year class.
November 11, 2025 at 1:04 AM
I don't want to both-sides here (the right is clearly worse) - but - I got extremely annoyed that this essay went viral here among very smart left wing types, in spite of outright making shit up bsky.app/profile/fede...
How will she ever be able to afford her 5th marriage :(
November 11, 2025 at 12:57 AM
How will she ever be able to afford her 5th marriage :(