Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Google Protest Leader Leaves

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

381–390 of 442 posts

Re: Google Protest Leader Leaves

#381

Post by xyzzyz »

joshuamorton wrote: post #346
xyzzyz wrote: post #322

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do you think so? Do you have a source of any of her supervisors saying that?

My source is the same document that the other poster mentioned. When did you leave? Because you know, people switch jobs, and her role at Google at the time of leaving was leading the Open Research Institute, which you might imagine has nothing to do with drive. But no I'm not going to share confidential information just because you don't believe me.

The "Open Research Institute" is a one-person affair that she created on her own. You can put anything you want in your job title in Moma, you know. That's why I was talking about everyone else in her ladder and team.

Re: Google Protest Leader Leaves

#382

Post by pvg »

belorn wrote: post #333
pvg wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

incredibly politicized concept as "equal compensation" (which doesn't exist [...] Take a look at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equal_pay_for_equal_work

Wikipedia is not a authoritative source. When it work perfectly it is a proportional description of what third-party sources write in regard to a topic, and at worst it is biased opinion based on a few authors. With political topics the most commonly written opinion might not be the most scientifically correct one. The main criticism of equal compensation is listed in the Wikipedia page in the first sentences under t…

No imperfection in the Wikipedia page supports either of the notions that systemic compensation issues are an inappropriate topic of workplace advocacy or that equal compensation has anything to do with economic outcomes for siblings (???). Both of these are in nigh non-sequitur territory.

Re: Google Protest Leader Leaves

#383

Post by neonate »

zorpner wrote: post #189
dmix wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So as long as you have good intentions you should be free to bring whatever politics to work? Regardless of how, as long as what your protesting the right things everything else doesn’t matter?

Tell people not to "bring whatever politics to work" is explicit endorsement of the status quo. There is no neutral stance; everything is political.

> everything is political

I just fixed a bug involving a typo in a regular expression. Do you think that was political? If so, I'd like to see how. If not, I'd like to know how to tell what is political apart from what is not political.

Re: Google Protest Leader Leaves

#384

Post by joshuamorton »

xyzzyz wrote: post #381
joshuamorton wrote: post #346

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My source is the same document that the other poster mentioned. When did you leave? Because you know, people switch jobs, and her role at Google at the time of leaving was leading the Open Research Institute, which you might imagine has nothing to do with drive. But no I'm not going to share confidential information just because you don't believe me.

The "Open Research Institute" is a one-person affair that she created on her own. You can put anything you want in your job title in Moma, you know. That's why I was talking about everyone else in her ladder and team.

Right, and she's reported to the same person for a while now, who has nothing to do with drive.

Re: Google Protest Leader Leaves

#385

Post by leftyted »

pessimizer wrote: post #274
leftyted wrote: post #199

There are two narratives: 1. These people are rabble-rousers who will never be happy and are disrupting the work environment at Google. 2. These people are highlighting legitimate problems within the company and are trying to enact positive change. Take your pick. But be aware of both narratives. And be aware that neither of them is unreasonable.

> These people are rabble-rousers who will never be happy No, this one is unreasonable. It's this weird narcissistic thing that people do where they define a person's identity by how that person feels about them . Just because I hate you doesn't mean I'm a hater. I also like things, just not you. Just because I'm unhappy with you doesn't mean that I am not happy, it means I'm not happy with you.

If I think my coworker is disagreeable and is preventing me from being productive and my coworker disagrees, am I "defining his/her identity"? That language seems very odd to me. What's the difference between "defining someone's identity" and "having an opinion about someone that is contrary to how they view themselves"?

More broadly, you seem to be saying that the only reason anyone is skeptical of the Google protestors is that that the protestors don't like that person. That's quite an assumption. In reality, people simply disagree about things. And there's room for reasonable disagreement.

Re: Google Protest Leader Leaves

#386

Post by dang »

fyoving wrote: post #73

One less person on the payroll to generate negative news and internal strife is surely a positive development.

We've banned this account for serially posting corporate propaganda for Google, which you've been doing on HN for years. Since banning dozens of your accounts hasn't convinced you to stop, I'm going to post about this increasingly loudly until you do stop. You should think about the many Google employees on HN, who overwhelmingly use this site in good faith. They represent Google the right way, by participating honestly in threads and commenting about what they know. They will cringe when they hear what you are doing—which if you keep doing it, they will. The agenda you've been propagating is a way to hurt Google, not help it.

We ask HN users every day not to accuse others of astroturfing or shillage, but the other side of the contract is that when we find real evidence of it, we crack down.

Edit: I should add, for those who are worried about bias, that we have nothing against Google and are only interested in protecting HN against abuse. People do that for other companies too, not just Google, and we're just as against it in those cases.

Re: Google Protest Leader Leaves

#387

Post by xyzzyz »

gdy wrote: post #345
departure wrote: post #307

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you not know how to use google? " rel="nofollow">https://ainowinstitute.org/research.html>

You missed the word 'exactly'. Can you summarize her work so that it doesn't sound trivial or bogus? Just looking at the titles I expect something similar in quality to articles debunked here: https://arxiv.org/abs/1905.09866

I clicked on the first one with her name, and the main conclusion was that AI needs more workplace diversity.

I clicked on the second one with her name, and the main conclusion was that AI needs more government regulation, labor unionization, and yes, you guessed correctly, workplace diversity.

I begin to feel that AI is only a red herring here.

Re: Google Protest Leader Leaves

#388

Post by gdy »

KirinDave wrote: post #364
gdy wrote: post #345

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You missed the word 'exactly'. Can you summarize her work so that it doesn't sound trivial or bogus? Just looking at the titles I expect something similar in quality to articles debunked here: https://arxiv.org/abs/1905.09866

So is the insinuation here that if she doesn't meet some arbitrary series of qualifications you put forth, it's okay for her to be illegally harassed out of her job? I'm reluctant to engage further because it seems like an absurd line of reasoning.

Nope, you've made yourself a straw man. I hope you did not do it intentionally because it's plainly disgusting. Please don't do that again.

You've said that she didn't just leave Google instead of protesting because she didn't 'want to see the thing you [she] worked so hard to build misused to build killer robots and "war minds"'.

You was asked what she actually did at Google and you've come up with 'her work on AI ethics was much appreciated and celebrated' as a response.

Looks like she was not working 'so hard' on anything that can be of any use for building 'killer robots and war "minds"'. In fact, for building anything.

Re: Google Protest Leader Leaves

#389

Post by xyzzyz »

joshuamorton wrote: post #384
xyzzyz wrote: post #381

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The "Open Research Institute" is a one-person affair that she created on her own. You can put anything you want in your job title in Moma, you know. That's why I was talking about everyone else in her ladder and team.

Right, and she's reported to the same person for a while now, who has nothing to do with drive.

And what is that person responsible for? Is it AI ethics?

Re: Google Protest Leader Leaves

#390

Post by xyzzyz »

leftyted wrote: post #385
pessimizer wrote: post #274

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> These people are rabble-rousers who will never be happy No, this one is unreasonable. It's this weird narcissistic thing that people do where they define a person's identity by how that person feels about them . Just because I hate you doesn't mean I'm a hater. I also like things, just not you. Just because I'm unhappy with you doesn't mean that I am not happy, it means I'm not happy with you.

If I think my coworker is disagreeable and is preventing me from being productive and my coworker disagrees, am I "defining his/her identity"? That language seems very odd to me. What's the difference between "defining someone's identity" and "having an opinion about someone that is contrary to how they view themselves"? More broadly, you seem to be saying that the only reason anyone is skeptical of the Google protes…

That language seems very odd to me. What's the difference between "defining someone's identity" and "having an opinion about someone that is contrary to how they view themselves"?

The difference is that once you establish that it's "defining someone's identity", then disagreement with that person is "denying their right to exist", and so basically violence, from which the person you disagreed with deserve protection. These are the lines along which this kind of conversations typically proceeded inside Google.

Post reply on HN