21–30 of 926 posts
Corporations and their managers care only about making money and maintaining good vibes to produce a positive business environment. Only unions engaging in strikes and outside pressure can force them to change materially. All these internal committees and such are just PR. By the way, that part about unions and strikes also applies to the joined at the hip government as well.
Unions have historically been some of the most racist and discriminatory organizations in the USA.
"withering email" == "anger-fueled message sent by a manager to a large group that asks readers to ignore company policy and start arguments with other leaders"
I don't see where "ethical AI researcher" comes into play here. Instead, I see a leader at a company unprofessionally sending messages to a large listserv and is later fired.
What am I missing?
Chief AI Scientist at Facebook, Yann Lecun, quit Twitter after a back and forth with this particular AI researcher - https://syncedreview.com/2020/06/30/yann-lecun-quits-twitter... >I’m always amazed at how people can continue to do thing after thing like this and then turn around and ask me for some sort of extra DEI work or input. This happened to me last year. I was in the middle of a potential lawsuit for which K…
This isn't the email that she sent with conditions she wanted met. Apparently she said she would resign if those conditions were not met, and the response to that email is that she was fired.
Maybe she's more mature than me, but they're probably not going to end up being super relevant.
> Thanks for making your conditions clear. We cannot agree to #1 and #2 as you are requesting. We respect your decision to leave Google as a result, and we are accepting your resignation.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's how it is supposed to work. If you complain to HR about your manager how can they reveal your identity when your manager controls your performance review and compensation?
Which doesn't seem to be what was happening here though, or at least there's no indication to that effect. At the same time, the narrative that someone above her in the management hierarchy decided to pull her research seems more plausible. In that case, I would tend to "Privacy for the Weak, Transparency for the Powerful." What you describe is the former, but this would seem to be a case of the latter.
Chief AI Scientist at Facebook, Yann Lecun, quit Twitter after a back and forth with this particular AI researcher - https://syncedreview.com/2020/06/30/yann-lecun-quits-twitter... >I’m always amazed at how people can continue to do thing after thing like this and then turn around and ask me for some sort of extra DEI work or input. This happened to me last year. I was in the middle of a potential lawsuit for which K…
I'm sure LeCun knows this too. It's a fact that has been known for almost 40 years now, that for a given generalization system multiple bias modes are are possible, and of course the process of optimizing architectures against a biased benchmark will change the learning bias of the model. It's not just datasets that are biased, generalization systems are necessarily biased too.
As for the last line, I don't know that it should be expected for employers to fire employees pursuing recourse against sexual harassment.
I'm sure we can agree that the tone wasn't good, but she does have a point in saying that it's not possible to reduce the bias to datasets used to train the final model.
The paper : http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~tom/pubs/NeedForBias_1980.pdf