AI researcher Timnit Gebru resigns from Google • Hacker News Board

Re: AI researcher Timnit Gebru resigns from Google

#441

Post by 1vuio0pswjnm7 » Thu, Dec 03, 2020, 10:19 PM UTC

tinyhouse wrote: post #95

Good for Google. I don't know anything about her, but her debate with Lecun on Twitter was enough for me to know she is toxic. I don't care how good of a researcher she is. The fact they fired her given the current climate shows they actually have balls. I had no idea... I read her email. You know what's crazy about it? she is talking about Google silencing marginalized voices. She keeps referring to herself as a mar…

"There's not even one sentence in her email about what is actually the content of her paper that is so controversial"

From the Jeff Dean email it seems like the "cross-functional team" (read: includes people who are focused on company's bottom line, not the subject matter of the paper) wanted some sort of "fair balance" when discussing AI. He cites some examples.

Does this mean if we review papers on AI from Google employees that Google has approved for publication in the past, we will consistently find this balanced view.

Re: AI researcher Timnit Gebru resigns from Google

#442

Post by telotortium » Thu, Dec 03, 2020, 10:19 PM UTC

voxl wrote: post #301

jseliger wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I recently re-read Noah Smith's essay "Leaders Who Act Like Outsiders Invite Trouble" https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2020-03-03/leader... . It's not directly on point, but one concept is: "This extraordinary trend of rank-and-file members challenging the leaders of their organizations goes beyond simple populism. There may be no word for this trend in the English language. But there is one in Japanese: ge…

The last thing I would ever want is to model corporate culture after Japan, one of the worst corporate cultures on the planet.

Gekokujō doesn't refer to Japanese corporate culture at all, but rather the attempted coups and going rogue by junior officers in the Japanese military of the 1920s and 1930s (for example, conquering Manchuria against orders of the senior officers).

Re: AI researcher Timnit Gebru resigns from Google

#443

Post by splaytreemap » Thu, Dec 03, 2020, 10:22 PM UTC

Copenjin wrote: post #183

I wonder why these privileged people (I don't have her huge salary, I don't live in the us or work for a FAANG) keeps forgetting that after all they are just _employees_.

I think the fact that she had a huge salary is why she feels comfortable doing this. The average person needs their job to pay the bills so they don't want to rock the boat. She's already set for life so she doesn't care who she offends because getting fired is not a big deal for her.

Re: AI researcher Timnit Gebru resigns from Google

#444

Post by chrononaut » Thu, Dec 03, 2020, 10:23 PM UTC

jeffbee wrote: post #388

contemporary343 wrote: post #292

It looks like the paper was critical of large language models: https://www.fastcompany.com/90582375/timnit-gebru-google-fir... The original article has been updated with Jeff Dean's response, while a member of Gebru's team (who still works at Google Brain) states that Dean's email is misleading and inaccurate: https://twitter.com/alexhanna/status/1334579764573691904 As I understand it: The paper had already been subm…

Quite a contrast between Dean's message and Gebru's. I know which one I'd want leading my team.

I wouldn't necessarily put them on equal footing. One likely had the editorial review of many eyes, while the other was a more personal, empathetic message.

Re: AI researcher Timnit Gebru resigns from Google

#445

Post by defen » Thu, Dec 03, 2020, 10:24 PM UTC

malcolmgreaves wrote: post #376

VHRanger wrote: post #281

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They submitted thee paper for internal review one day before their external deadline. They set themselves up for failure regardless of the paper's content.

Their paper was accepted by the conference's peer review system. Google, not researchers in the community, wanted it retracted. The only logical explanation is that it was good science that did not put Google is a positive light.

> Their paper was accepted by the conference's peer review system.

Source? The linked article says it was submitted but nothing about whether it was accepted. If it was accepted, is it available for public viewing?

Re: AI researcher Timnit Gebru resigns from Google

#446

Post by tinyhouse » Thu, Dec 03, 2020, 10:24 PM UTC

cdata wrote: post #405

tinyhouse wrote: post #95

Good for Google. I don't know anything about her, but her debate with Lecun on Twitter was enough for me to know she is toxic. I don't care how good of a researcher she is. The fact they fired her given the current climate shows they actually have balls. I had no idea... I read her email. You know what's crazy about it? she is talking about Google silencing marginalized voices. She keeps referring to herself as a mar…

I'm partially sympathetic to this point of view. I agree that Timnit will ultimately be fine, despite what she is going through right now. I also agree that Google should ultimately do whatever it wants in accordance with its determined corporate policies. However, you really should read https://abc.xyz/investor/founders-letters/2004-ipo-letter/ Anyone who recalls this letter should be able to muster sympathy for tho…

I disagree. In one thread she responds with tweets such as: "“I’m sick of this framing. Tired of it. ", "Again. UNBELIEVABLE. , "tell your fanboys to stop trolling me". Basically she was telling Lecun he's an idiot of not agreeing with her. And pretty much everyone else who is not agreeing with her.

Did you see Jeff Dean's email they just added to the article? Not surprisingly, she is doing the same thing. The reviewers are not agreeing with her and she is shocked how someone dares to reject her paper. She starts making demands to reveal who that was and sends an email to the Women AI list like it's some racist attack against her because she is a woman and black researcher. That's a toxic behavior of a very arrogant researcher. She clearly expects to get some preferential treatment because she is a big shot researcher or she just thinks she is smarter than everyone else. The irony.

Re: AI researcher Timnit Gebru resigns from Google

#447

Post by thebladerunner » Thu, Dec 03, 2020, 10:29 PM UTC

ConceptJunkie wrote: post #400

dash2 wrote: post #374

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some refereeing processes are anonymous, and there can be good reasons for that, like preventing academic logrolling. It's standard in academia.

But the feedback itself wasn't shared with her. That part doesn't make sense unless management didn't want her to see it, and why would that be the case?

Because (a) by the rules of engagement, management is not required to share original feedback, and (b) the original feedback could be used to identify the sources. In this case, there might have been a real risk to the sources given the individual in question is known to mobilize internal and external forces like Twitter mobs to personally attack people and bully them into submission.

Re: AI researcher Timnit Gebru resigns from Google

#448

Post by Andraia » Thu, Dec 03, 2020, 10:29 PM UTC

mkolodny wrote: post #428

Bukhmanizer wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s more relevant, but probably doesn’t tell the whole story considering she very heavily hints that she gave them a list of demands or she would resign, and Google just accepted her resignation.

"Timnit responded with an email requiring that a number of conditions be met in order for her to continue working at Google, including revealing the identities of every person who Megan and I had spoken to and consulted as part of the review of the paper and the exact feedback. Timnit wrote that if we didn’t meet these demands, she would leave Google and work on an end date." We don't know the full list of demands, b…

> We don't know the full list of demands

Timnit is far from silent. She could share them if she wanted to. She appears to think that that would hurt rather than help her.

Re: AI researcher Timnit Gebru resigns from Google

#449

Post by 1024core » Thu, Dec 03, 2020, 10:29 PM UTC

This person forced Yann LeCun (one of the top 3 AI/ML researchers today, head of Facebook AI, and an ML researcher since the 80s) to give up on Twitter after she took exception to this tweet of his: https://twitter.com/ylecun/status/1274782757907030016

She lives her life attacking people who she disagrees with, and brings in race/gender into any conflict where she's involved.

I am surprised Google had hired her, because it was only a matter of time they'd become collateral damage in this roving tornado of hate and aggression.

From what I have seen today, she gave them an ultimatum: do this, this and that or else I will leave. They decided to not do those things she demanded, and then proceeded to fire her before she could do any more internal damage.

Re: AI researcher Timnit Gebru resigns from Google

#450

Post by deanCommie » Thu, Dec 03, 2020, 10:30 PM UTC

parliament32 wrote: post #26

I don't think "fired" is the right choice of words -- she gave an ultimatum offering to resign, and they accepted her resignation. Is accepting a resignation the same as firing someone? > 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. https://twitter.com/timnitGebru/status/1334364…

Wife says to her programmer husband, "Go to the store and buy a loaf of bread. If they have eggs, buy a dozen."

Husband returns with 12 loaves of bread.

Most software engineers can read the above joke, and laugh at themselves, then go ahead and upvote your comment not realizing that it is EXACTLY THE SAME THING.

Employee: "This is extremely important to me. If you can't address what is important to me, then I can't work here anymore"

Google: "OK, thanks for your resignation".

This is not okay. Google is "technically correct" - but it is appalling behavior that should make every Googler shake with discomfort.

Employees are people. People can get dissatisfied. Frustrated. Angry. Sure, you can say companies don't owe anything to anyone because there is at-will employment.

But the reality is unless we want to live in a dystopia, people should be allowed to voice concerns and anger and frustrations, and not be fired for making things uncomfortable or inconvenient.