Didn't Google have a motto of "Don't be evil," and then new management retired the saying? What's stopping that from happening again in this case?
No, it's still in there code of conduct.
AI at Google: our principles
351–360 of 418 posts
Re: AI at Google: our principles
#352Earlier quoted context omitted.
It gets complicated but it's more about the employees responsibility to shareholders. Not their personal morals. https://www.reddit.com/r/law/comments/3pv8bh/is_it_really_tr...
And do you know what can happen when a person's own morals or ethics come in to conflict with their responsibility to shareholders? They can quit. They can speak out. They can organize. They can petition for change. They could join the more ethical competition (if one exists), or start their own. This is especially easy to do for employees of a company like Google, with excellent job prospects and often enough "fuck…
I used to work at google about 5 years ago. While I was there it was clear that Google employed some of the most morally conscience people I've ever worked with. It's why I still trust them to this day with data that I would never trust anyone else with. As long as Google employees continue to have a voice in the company I'll continue to trust them.
Re: AI at Google: our principles
#353As someone who has worked in the defense industry his entire career (and served in the Army before that), I find the general tone of most of these comments - in particular the ones coming from supposedly loyal American citizens - disturbing (not to mention insulting). Almost makes me wish we'd actually institute mandatory national service.
That said, I'd love to work on ML/AI related defense projects. Thanks to Google, more of this type of work will surely be thrown over to the traditional defense contractors - so maybe I'll get that chance, eh?
Re: AI at Google: our principles
#354Earlier quoted context omitted.
Many of the Googlers involved in the campaign against Project Maven are engineers of high caliber and those I know of are fairly activist in general. While I haven't always agreed with those I've interacted with, they're high quality people with high quality records. The sort of Googlers protesting Maven are the sort of Googlers who made Google the sort of company people loved. And they've put their careers on the li…
I don't know how accurate it is to say that these engineers have put their careers on the line. It could also be that they wouldn't be able to make these statements were they not secure enough in their jobs to feel their careers wouldn't be on the line.
While they definitely have above average incomes and probably some good financial security, there's a Damore factor risk: Public attention could render them unhireable if they come off as troublesome or likely to cause issues with future employers.
Re: AI at Google: our principles
#355Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is it better to develop weapons tech for your own in-group, or to risk being on the receiving end of weapons tech that another group developed and against which you can't defend yourself due to your earlier principled stand?
I don't think it's a given that if you don't develop a certain type of weapon it renders you unable to defend yourself against it.
No, but it's a given that if you don't develop weapons tech at all, it renders you unable to defend against weapons that you would otherwise be able to counter.
Re: AI at Google: our principles
#356As much as I appreciate the conflict of interest here between doing good, making money, helping the US government do its thing, and simply chickening out for PR reasons; I'd like to provide a few sobering thoughts. AI and misappropriation by governments, foreign nations, and worse is going to happen. We might not like it but that cat has long been out of the bag. So, the right attitude is not to decline to do the res…
This was basically the same argument the Zentrumspartei made for voting for the Enabling Act in 1933.
What was their argument? Do you have a link?
Re: AI at Google: our principles
#357Earlier quoted context omitted.
I am aware of America's many follies and villainous acts in support of misguided notions. It's regrettable, but Americans as a group have strived to rectify wrongs and steer our country in the right direction. I deeply cherish our American values and think they're what set us apart from the rest of the world. I can't for the life of me see why Sundar Pichai should be beholden to his (significantly foreign) employees…
> . It's regrettable, but Americans as a group have strived to rectify wrongs and steer our country in the right direction. I deeply cherish our American values and think they're what set us apart from the rest of the world. Ha. Ha ha. Hahahah. Please, keep drinking that Kool-Aid of American exceptionalism. Apart from the British, which other country has contributed to more invasions in foreign countries for the sake…
> Apart from the British, which other country has contributed to more invasions in foreign countries for the sake of purely economic interests?
The "purely economic interests" qualifier makes your question difficult to answer, but France has likely been involved in more invasions in foreign countries.
https://www.reddit.com/r/MapPorn/comments/7ax7g1/all_countri...
Re: AI at Google: our principles
#358Earlier quoted context omitted.
I doubt that Google spelling out their moral stance is intended to convince you right away that they're all good now. It's a public standard that they're setting for themselves. If you think their actions don't match their words, you now have concrete terms and principles to critique and compare with. It's a benchmark to which employees and the public can hold them accountable.
Given how a lot of people don't hold Microsoft accountable for past misdeeds (the 4 last posts about github acquisition are endless arguments about it), there is few reasons to believe it's going to be different with google. For them, it's always better to benefit from screwing up. If you don't get caught, yay ! If you do, apologize, wait a bit, and send your PR team go their magic. Bim, you are green again. Why woul…
If people are complaining about Microsoft acquiring GitHub then is that not people trying to hold Microsoft accountable?
If Microsoft's sins were truly forgiven or forgotten, people wouldn't be complaining about the acquisition.
Re: AI at Google: our principles
#359Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's a pity - as someone in stereo machine vision, metrology is something we really really need for a huge range of applications - that said, if its feeding an autonomous armed targeting system, I agree. We really need to decide as a species we want to continue being a species and realize that solving problems with each other by force is coming to an end. I'm not speaking from a pacifist viewpoint, just a practical…
Russia reportedly has armed robots capable of operating autonomously and they preemptively refused to honor any ban, and other nations are developing their own. As terrifying as the prospect is, it's already happening.
Russia didn't say that they refused to honor any ban, they said they refused to honor any ban that was based on trust. Their point was that, unlike nuclear weapons, these types of devices can be manufactured in secret or can be manufactured to be quickly convertible into fully autonomous devices.
I far more concerned about the hackability of civilian autonomous systems than I am about Russia's killbots. If Russia wants to end the world they already can and paranoid militaries make more secure cyber systems than random internet connected cars or planes.
Re: AI at Google: our principles
#360Google is a front company like Amazon, facebook, Microsoft and Palantir... More
Front companies in the US intelligence industry :
There are at least four flavors [like subatomic particles]....
1) The non-Corporation - with only a room, desk and incorporation papers - maybe one or a few employees playing golf. Just a front and cut-out.
2) The Corporation that does favors when asked for the Company or other intelligence agencies.
3) The medium to full-size firm or Company that is dedicated to working for intelligence and what they do other is only for cover.
4) The Corporation that has some persons within working for intelligence, while others have no idea and are not.