[m0zg]

Still won't help. Simple fact of life is: to attract research talent you have to let your researchers publish (and not anonymously like they started doing recently, but under their own names), and afford them considerable freedom in what to publish. There's no way in hell Apple will do that, with or without Goodfellow. Good for Ian, I suppose, but Apple will continue to languish in AI until it reconsiders its stolid, old fashioned ways (and/or starts paying crazy money to researchers so publishing ceases to matter as much).

[weaklearner]

eh honestly a lot AI people might give up publishing for a little while to work with/around goodfellow.

[m0zg]

Why give up _anything_ and not go to e.g. Google Brain or FAIR or MSR instead? All three labs have dozens of people of comparable caliber _each_. At this point Apple is starting at a massive disadvantage, and they'd need to offer a radically better game to catch up. Which is something they aren't prepared to do.

[weaklearner]

If your researched is focused on Gans/adversarial stuff the specificity of working with goodfellow might out-weigh some other concerns. Also-hey-I'm not trying to make this tradeoff. I am just saying I can imagine someone else choosing to do so.

personally if I had offer from Google/MSR I'd take it over apple but I'd much rather work for apple than facebook even if yann le cunn told me I was cooler than sliced bread.

edit: also re-reading your comment I bet apple is willing to pay that crazy money. Goodfellow probably has compensation in 1-10 million range...

[m0zg]

7 figures is table stakes for top people in this field. The question is, what the distribution is like for the kinds of folks they need to hire to get the actual work done.