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

AI researcher Timnit Gebru resigns from Google

platformer.news

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

881–890 of 926 posts

Re: AI researcher Timnit Gebru resigns from Google

#881

Post by geofft »

kspacewalk2 wrote: post #865
frongpik wrote: post #612

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Her real job was to make google look good in the progressive circles. If she understood that, she would've made a stellar career.

Her real job is in AI activism, not AI academia. She understands that very well, and she understands that an acrimonious parting of ways with Google, combined with obligatory accusations of racist bias, is a reasonable career advancement step in the field of activism (though it may have been distracting and debilitating in the field of academia).

Right. She offered her resignation. Google mishandled it, but obviously, she was ready to be thrown out of the organization. So saying "She could have stayed if only ___" misunderstands the entire situation - she wasn't trying to stay. She was trying to get the world to understand something about Google and how ethical the folks in charge of Google's AI are.

Re: AI researcher Timnit Gebru resigns from Google

#882

Post by kazamaloo »

FeepingCreature wrote: post #831
kazamaloo wrote: post #792

Earlier quoted context omitted.

it is sort of a placeholder approval. The actual reviews may be done by a legal team, HR/PR, other researchers in the field etc.

A "placeholder approval" is also known as an "approval". If they didn't want to approve it, they shouldn't have done it.

what you refer to as "they" are two different entities.

Re: AI researcher Timnit Gebru resigns from Google

#883

Post by dragonwriter »

rishav_sharan wrote: post #733
jsmith45 wrote: post #486

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It sounds to me like Google has a policy that papers must be internally reviewed before they can be "published". She understood publish in the academic sense, while Google views sending the paper out for conference review as publishing. The paper ends up failing internal review, so per policy it must be promptly retracted. This is confusing to the academic who expects to get access to the raw review responses so that…

I don't think it's miscommunication in anyway. Timnit had submitted dozens of papers before and unless the process requirements are completely new, she would be well aware of them. This seems more of a case of selective enforcement, where she had been allowed to go around the process in the past (or felt that she has enough leverage to be able to do so now) and then not being allowed to do so this time. This feels li…

> Timnit had submitted dozens of papers before and unless the process requirements are completely new, she would be well aware of them. This seems more of a case of selective enforcement, where she had been allowed to go around the process in the past (or felt that she has enough leverage to be able to do so now) and then not being allowed to do so this time.

If the established practice differs from the nominal process, a no-notice switch to rigorously enforcing the nominal process is for most practical purposes no different than a no-notice change of process. Out of date documentation is at least as common in human processes as software; the real process is what is actually recurrently executed, including how that recurrent practice takes into account position of particular participants.

Re: AI researcher Timnit Gebru resigns from Google

#884

Post by chokeartist »

sudosysgen wrote: post #873
chokeartist wrote: post #835

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That statement is contained in a paper I linked that dates from 1980. I'm pretty sure it's factually correct, because I'm trying to make nothing but a demonstration that an idée reçue, that ML systems are only based due to their data, is incorrect. That's reasonable. I may have taken the initial text in the wrong context. Thanks for clarifying. To expand on my prior comment of "Fuck x group", perhaps the tone of pr…

I think there is a bit of a double standard here. I try in general to be as charitable to both sides of an agreement possible. If your standard for uncharitability is such that the linked tweet is a proof of racism, I don't understand why one would take a tweet claiming against overwhelming evidence at face value. Personally, I don't think either indicate racism. I see the link you tweeted as an excessively abrasive…

Whatever dude. You people are delusional. Stop bending over backwards to defend dumb ideas. To do so otherwise opens you up to mockery and ridicule of your otherwise substantive thoughts.

Re: AI researcher Timnit Gebru resigns from Google

#885

Post by beaunative »

cbsks wrote: post #844
shuckles wrote: post #611

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I will say that having many processes, selectively enforced is a common cover for disparate treatment.

That’s a good point. How many other Google researchers have submitted papers to conferences without waiting for the 2 week internal review to complete? What happened in those cases if the paper failed the internal review? Without more context it’s impossible to tell if this was a case of discrimination or just a case a researcher not following Google’s internal policies and suffering the consequences.

I don't think we even need data on this. One or two day prior is unthinkable, just per common sense. Although data points would be valuable and appreciated but we don't really need data to understand the one or two day is just not enough time for anyone or anything.

It's not like there are a bunch of dedicated reviewers, it's always other researchers who review. I don't think some of the most valued papers like MapReduce or BigTable would be reviewed in just a day or two. It's just not a reasonable amount of time in any condition in terms of reviewing research papers.

Re: AI researcher Timnit Gebru resigns from Google

#886

Post by beaunative »

tdeck wrote: post #731
powersnail wrote: post #586

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While there hasn't been enough evidence to fully condemn either side, I disagree that this is just poor communication. Unless Google deliberately changed the enforcement of the policy just to mess with her, she should have known the policy. It doesn't seem to be a complicated process, and 2 weeks is a reasonably short time to wait. On the other side, Google has been in this game long enough, that they must know a pap…

In any large company there are lots of process rules and internal deadlines that are unrealistic for whatever reason and don't get followed in practice, leading to many last-minute exceptions. I don't know about the specific case of research papers, but if would not surprise me at all if "one day before the deadline" were a common submission timeframe at Google. Of course that not ideal and probably sucks for the tea…

A lot of process rules are unrealistic, but that doesn't mean this one is, and that can't be used to conclude that all internal processes are unrealistic and wouldn't be followed. It's an quite unrealistic statement to make. Most places rely on internal processes to work, and it would be extremely rare for any case of exception.

Re: AI researcher Timnit Gebru resigns from Google

#887

Post by throwaway2245 »

that_guy_iain wrote: post #762
throwaway2245 wrote: post #640

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One unusual privilege that she has is the ability to describe her experience of racism and sexism and expect to be listened to - her e-mail here speaks mostly on this point. Her e-mail identifies that you can speak on racism and sexism as much as you want, but all of your speech will be routed to /dev/null.

> Her e-mail identifies that you can speak on racism and sexism as much as you want, but all of your speech will be routed to /dev/null. I think the fact people need to go through HR to give Feedback means the speech isn't going to /dev/null. People seem to take her speech very seriously and don't want to feel her wrath. In fact, Google even appeared to take her concerns onboard after she got a lawyer and only threat…

(My intention above was to say that Timnit Gebru does have that privilege, and is using it to speak for other people who don't have that privilege)

Re: AI researcher Timnit Gebru resigns from Google

#888

Post by sudosysgen »

chokeartist wrote: post #884
sudosysgen wrote: post #873

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think there is a bit of a double standard here. I try in general to be as charitable to both sides of an agreement possible. If your standard for uncharitability is such that the linked tweet is a proof of racism, I don't understand why one would take a tweet claiming against overwhelming evidence at face value. Personally, I don't think either indicate racism. I see the link you tweeted as an excessively abrasive…

Whatever dude. You people are delusional. Stop bending over backwards to defend dumb ideas. To do so otherwise opens you up to mockery and ridicule of your otherwise substantive thoughts.

What "dumb idea" am I defending?

Re: AI researcher Timnit Gebru resigns from Google

#889

Post by opo »

dnautics wrote: post #97
ardy42 wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Unions have historically been some of the most racist and discriminatory organizations in the USA. The USA has been pretty racist in discriminatory, and I think it's disingenuous to single out unions for that history. I mean, who instituted Jim Crow and profited from slavery? White voters, government officials, and private enterprise. Unions were definitely not leading that.

That history is not entirely correct. Typically private enterprise has been against segregation: Think about it, it is pretty expensive to have to maintain two sets of facilities for society. The montgomery bus company was AGAINST segregation when the laws forcing bus segregation were passed. Barry Goldwater donated a ton of money in the early days first NAACP chapter in Arizona in part because segregating his depart…

>...Typically private enterprise has been against segregation

Unclear why you were downvoted. Another example of this was Plessy v. Ferguson where the railroad worked with a civil rights group to bring the case:

>...On June 7, 1892, Plessy bought a first-class ticket at the Press Street Depot and boarded a "Whites Only" car of the East Louisiana Railroad in New Orleans, Louisiana, bound for Covington, Louisiana.[11] The railroad company, which had opposed the law on the grounds that it would require the purchase of more railcars, had been previously informed of Plessy's racial lineage, and the intent to challenge the law.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plessy_v._Ferguson

Re: AI researcher Timnit Gebru resigns from Google

#890

Post by dragonwriter »

dragonwriter wrote: post #883
rishav_sharan wrote: post #733

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think it's miscommunication in anyway. Timnit had submitted dozens of papers before and unless the process requirements are completely new, she would be well aware of them. This seems more of a case of selective enforcement, where she had been allowed to go around the process in the past (or felt that she has enough leverage to be able to do so now) and then not being allowed to do so this time. This feels li…

> Timnit had submitted dozens of papers before and unless the process requirements are completely new, she would be well aware of them. This seems more of a case of selective enforcement, where she had been allowed to go around the process in the past (or felt that she has enough leverage to be able to do so now) and then not being allowed to do so this time. If the established practice differs from the nominal proce…

Also, the description of the official process (much less what is typically done in practice) seems to be in dispute:

https://twitter.com/timnitGebru/status/1335017524937756672?s...

Post reply on HN