We're a small team dedicated to elimination of memory safety errors. We're maintaining the C2Rust tools and use it to move C code to Rust. See https://github.com/memorysafety/rav1d for an example of our recent work. Check out our github for (https://github.com/immunant) for other examples of the types of work we do.
If you're good at systems programming, we'd like to hear from you. Specifically, we're interested with folks who have significant experience in one or more of these technical areas:
- C/C++ and/or Rust (familiarity with assembly language is a plus)
- Compilers for any of the above languages (LLVM experience is a plus)
- Operating systems, hypervisors, firmware, bootloaders, JITs.
- Build systems commonly used in the above technical areas.
Folks with superficial knowledge in one of these areas are not encouraged to apply. If you have experience managing software developers in addition to meeting the technical requirements, you are encouraged to reach out. Please note that we can only consider candidates resident in the US.
We offer a remote-friendly, highly collaborative work environment with high flexibility and competitive benefits.
Send your resume to team@immunant.com; we look forward to meeting you.
To me this sounds pedantic, a good argument for a discretionary recruiting process and a good indicator of a bad interview/work experience. Why don't they instead try to define what superficial means? What do they expect from candidates in a way that can be measured? How many years of professional/research experience?
If you're interested in low-level, resource-constrained and/or privileged execution environments, consider joining our small team. At Immunant, we spend much time staring at weird build errors, ISA or ABI documentation, or digging through obscure build systems or C code written 20 years ago. In any case, we strive to make the systems we're working on more secure, more efficient, and have more Rust in them (whenever we get a chance).
If you have recent, professional experience with C/C++ and Rust and know about operating systems, hypervisor internals, or compilers, we'd love to hear from you. Candidates with only superficial knowledge in all of these areas are not encouraged to apply. Please note that we can only consider candidates resident in the US.
We offer a remote-friendly, collaborative work environment with a high degree of autonomy and competitive benefits.
Send your resume to team@immunant.com; we look forward to hearing from you.
If you're interested in low-level, resource-constrained and/or privileged execution environments, consider joining our small team. At Immunant, we spend much time staring at weird build errors, ISA or ABI documentation, or digging through obscure build systems or C code written 20 years ago. In any case, we strive to make the systems we're working on more secure, more efficient, and have more Rust in them (whenever we get a chance).
If you have recent, professional experience with C/C++ and Rust and know about operating systems, hypervisor internals, or compilers, we'd love to hear from you. Candidates with only superficial knowledge in all of these areas are not encouraged to apply. Please note that we can only consider candidates resident in the US.
We offer a remote-friendly, collaborative work environment with a high degree of autonomy and competitive benefits.
Send your resume to team@immunant.com; we look forward to hearing from you.
This is precisely what so many do not get when they are arguing against independent, skeptical academics or scientists. The academics/scientists get basically nothing from their position. Sure, they get papers and maybe tenure and so on, but they can get those holding either position. Meanwhile, on the other side we have people with literally millions riding on the position. I wonder who will provide a better unbiased take?
This is further muddied in the LLM debate, as we have a generation (of mostly nerdy middle class white men) who grew up on sci-fi desperately want their boyhood fantasies to come true. I was one of them, but I got over it - we're not colonizing Mars to save humanity and an LLM is not anything resembling AGI. People not invested in the narrative can see that LLMs, while amazing at generating sensible sounding text, are not even remotely close to reasoning AGI.
I agree with both of these takes but want to add that the tool might not have been tested on all the languages spoken outside of the US. Can't be too careful with kids in the target audience.
> The only that I think is given that will expand its global market share is China.
That doesn't make sense given that all the other big blocks are cooperating across borders while China is subject to stiff export controls in an area with real technological chokepoints.
PRC is entrant, west is incumbant with majority of global shares to lose. PRC building up mature nodes, which is still plurarity of chips, which they can soon with indigenous supply chains. As since they are huge export source, and intermediate good source, they get to inject their own chips into everything on global markets. Of which they now trade more with global south than they do western bloc. West can consolidate within bloc, but they'll start to lose large segements of global share, which is where future growth will be. Loss of global revenue, will in turn impact west ability to R&D without large subsidies, which drives down commercial viability. There was study analysing result of PRC domestic overcapacity turn into exports in various sectors like solar, display etc, and their effects on incumbant leaders (predominantly western firms) operating profits, and the effect was like 50-100% loss. The TLDR is west already has dominant global share, any share PRC gains on global market is share lost by west, and west is going to lose big if they retreat/consolidate around only monopolizing western shares .
