Google staff rally behind fired AI researcher

I’ve read some of her research (that’s on arxiv) and it’s... not on the level that “Google AI researcher” implies. It’s good that they hire from the Humanities, but we tend to smush all academics as if they all had equal rigor and value.

Maybe she’s a great activist. Or a great cook. Being it that I’m not into activism, I can’t judge that.

----

Edit: I have to hijack my sudden spike in karma (and, I assume, visibility) to "amplify" some important research milestones in the Humanities that impact the problem of "AI ethics" taken seriously.

[General]

* Baudrillard - "Forget Foucault"

* Delanda - "Philosophy and simulation"

[Science and technology issues]

* Latour - "The Pasteurization of France"

* Latour - "Reassembling the social"

* Caillon - "Acting in an uncertain world"

[Computers and society]

* Various authors - "Software Studies: a lexicon", available here https://monoskop.org/images/a/a1/Fuller_Matthew_ed_Software_...

A book about how toxic this is and how it needs to change, right? This small detail seems sort of missing from your comment.

    Hi everyone,

    I’m sure many of you have seen that Timnit Gebru is no longer working at Google. This is a difficult moment, especially given the important research topics she was involved in, and how deeply we care about responsible AI research as an org and as a company.

    Because there’s been a lot of speculation and misunderstanding on social media, I wanted to share more context about how this came to pass, and assure you we’re here to support you as you continue the research you’re all engaged in.

    Timnit co-authored a paper with four fellow Googlers as well as some external collaborators that needed to go through our review process (as is the case with all externally submitted papers). We’ve approved dozens of papers that Timnit and/or the other Googlers have authored and then published, but as you know, papers often require changes during the internal review process (or are even deemed unsuitable for submission). Unfortunately, this particular paper was only shared with a day’s notice before its deadline — we require two weeks for this sort of review — and then instead of awaiting reviewer feedback, it was approved for submission and submitted.

    A cross functional team then reviewed the paper as part of our regular process and the authors were informed that it didn’t meet our bar for publication and were given feedback about why. It ignored too much relevant research — for example, it talked about the environmental impact of large models, but disregarded subsequent research showing much greater efficiencies.  Similarly, it raised concerns about bias in language models, but didn’t take into account recent research to mitigate these issues. We acknowledge that the authors were extremely disappointed with the decision that Megan and I ultimately made, especially as they’d already submitted the paper. 

    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 accept and respect her decision to resign from Google.

    Given Timnit's role as a respected researcher and a manager in our Ethical AI team, I feel badly that Timnit has gotten to a place where she feels this way about the work we’re doing. I also feel badly that hundreds of you received an email just this week from Timnit telling you to stop work on critical DEI programs. Please don’t. I understand the frustration about the pace of progress, but we have important work ahead and we need to keep at it.

    I know we all genuinely share Timnit’s passion to make AI more equitable and inclusive. No doubt, wherever she goes after Google, she’ll do great work and I look forward to reading her papers and seeing what she accomplishes.

    Thank you for reading and for all the important work you continue to do. 

    -Jeff

I personally find HN to be generally liberal-leaning but not excessively so, and have noticed a welcome openness to centrist opinions that might once have been dismissed here out of hand as right-wing (and are still being dismissed elsewhere) that I take as a good sign of an increasingly aware local commentariat with respect to the excesses of the more ideological elements of the left and right.