We read the paper that forced Timnit Gebru out of Google • Hacker News Board

Re: We read the paper that forced Timnit Gebru out of Google

#211

Post by threeseed » Sat, Dec 05, 2020, 10:58 AM UTC

bartread wrote: post #173

saagarjha wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The paper DID NOT force her out of Google. Her subsequent behaviour - submitting without approval, rant, ultimatum, and resignation - did. And she wasn't "forced out": she resigned of her own volition. She could have chosen to make improvements to the paper based on the feedback she was given, resubmit it for approval, and then get on with her life, but she went the other way. This sounds a lot like taking what Goo…

> This sounds a lot like taking what Google said without including Timnit’s point of view. Not at all. I've read everything she's written on the issue including the long message she wrote to the brain group, and her tweets where she shared what Google said when they accepted her resignation. These latter make specific reference to the ultimatum, which was the ultimate reason for her departure. As I pointed out in the…

I've only heard of unethical companies firing people immediately without honouring the notice period.

It's definitely not common place and should not be encouraged except under severe circumstances e.g. violence, criminality etc.

Re: We read the paper that forced Timnit Gebru out of Google

#212

Post by _cs2017_ » Sat, Dec 05, 2020, 10:59 AM UTC

ardit33 wrote: post #137

_cs2017_ wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you think the employer weren't aware they were hiring an activist?

I feel google was being open minded, but the other party was not, and actually being malicious... basically: instead of reform, and fixing whats broken; to tear it down, as it is just another means of oppression.... (yes, that's the mindset of the movement). Her research, looks to be mean spirited, and made to discredit google, so it can be blackmailed into whatever the ideology wants. It is not meant to fix/improve…

Was this outcome that difficult to predict based on the hiring interviews, and based on prior articles and public statements? In other words, would this come as a surprise to a half decent hiring manager and hiring committee?

Re: We read the paper that forced Timnit Gebru out of Google

#213

Post by svrtknst » Sat, Dec 05, 2020, 11:02 AM UTC

_cs2017_ wrote: post #116

Despite what both sides claim, IMHO papers like this are primarily PR, ideology, and politics, rather than science and technology. This is akin to a speech writer working for a politician, writing a piece that disagrees with the party platform, and refusing to fix it when asked.

For any application of meaningful size, "science and technology" cannot be divorced from "ideology and politics".

I'm not blaming you solely but the recurring idea that it can is worrying.

Re: We read the paper that forced Timnit Gebru out of Google

#214

Post by pseudalopex » Sat, Dec 05, 2020, 11:03 AM UTC

bartread wrote: post #208

Jabbles wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't see how you can possibly be that confident about the truth of what happened. Unless you have non-public information, then there is still considerable uncertainty. Timnit says she was fired: https://twitter.com/timnitGebru/status/1334352694664957952 Jeff Dean's email says the article was "approved", though clearly not approved enough: https://www.platformer.news/p/the-withering-email-that-got-a... Other resear…

Timnit also shared a number of tweets, which you can easily access via the one you referenced, where she quotes from the email that Google sent her in response to her ultimatum. They accepted her resignation and brought her finish date forward. They cited her message to the brain group as reason for doing so (without the resignation I suspect she may have faced some disciplinary action, though whether it would have g…

Unilaterally changing the date would make it a termination.

Re: We read the paper that forced Timnit Gebru out of Google

#215

Post by saagarjha » Sat, Dec 05, 2020, 11:03 AM UTC

bartread wrote: post #184

saagarjha wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

…and? Did you not consider it useful to mention at all? Do you think you’ve already included what she mentioned?

Do you really think it's valuable for me to regurgitate an entire discussion that I've provided a link to (and which anyone can easily read) in my comment when what I'm actually trying to do is make a wider, but relatively pithy, point about journalistic integrity and the impact that the lack of it is having on our societies more than comment on Timnit's specific case? I will say that your comments are an almost perf…

Timnit claims she was fired, you’ve completely erased that part from the discussion and used it to prove a point about journalistic integrity. You provided a link to a massive discussion that has clearly not yet been able to piece through the details. When I asked you why you were so confident in your position that Timnit was clearly in the wrong and rightfully terminated because she didn’t comply with what Google told her to do, you decided that I lack journalistic integrity.

Google, talking through Jeff Dean, claims that Timnit was unhappy with her situation and submitted a good faith resignation which Google accepted due to her not following their policies. Timnit claims that she was forced into a position where she had to issue her ultimatum, forcing her into a resignation. And we have claims from Google employees saying that the process she had was unusual and did not match a normal review. Isn’t the true journalistic malpractice ignoring this and claiming that any title that doesn’t match your view, which appears to be Google’s view of the situation is inaccurate?

Re: We read the paper that forced Timnit Gebru out of Google

#216

Post by basicneo » Sat, Dec 05, 2020, 11:03 AM UTC

visarga wrote: post #196

hezag wrote: post #49

I did not read the paper (just like most people here), but by the title — “On the Dangers of Stochastic Parrots: Can Language Models Be Too Big?” — it does not look like the CO2 emissions thing is the main topic of this research. BTW, "Stochastic Parrots" is a very descriptive name for the problem > Moreover, because the training datasets are so large, it’s hard to audit them to check for these embedded biases. “A me…

> BTW, "Stochastic Parrots" is a very descriptive name for the problem Meh, both parrots and language models are inferior to humans in producing language, but one is more useful than the other. And real parrots are also stochastic, like all living things.

Analogies aren't meant to withhold careful scrutiny. They're suggestive.

Re: We read the paper that forced Timnit Gebru out of Google

#217

Post by threeseed » Sat, Dec 05, 2020, 11:04 AM UTC

bartread wrote: post #208

Jabbles wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't see how you can possibly be that confident about the truth of what happened. Unless you have non-public information, then there is still considerable uncertainty. Timnit says she was fired: https://twitter.com/timnitGebru/status/1334352694664957952 Jeff Dean's email says the article was "approved", though clearly not approved enough: https://www.platformer.news/p/the-withering-email-that-got-a... Other resear…

Timnit also shared a number of tweets, which you can easily access via the one you referenced, where she quotes from the email that Google sent her in response to her ultimatum. They accepted her resignation and brought her finish date forward. They cited her message to the brain group as reason for doing so (without the resignation I suspect she may have faced some disciplinary action, though whether it would have g…

No-one knows fully without seeing her employment contract.

But having worked at many companies similar to Google in similar roles it is not normal for (a) contracts to not have notice periods and (b) for companies to not honour them.

And IP-flight risk is a concern for many roles but it's typically handled through legal channels as we've seen with Uber.

Re: We read the paper that forced Timnit Gebru out of Google

#218

Post by threeseed » Sat, Dec 05, 2020, 11:05 AM UTC

StavrosK wrote: post #209

threeseed wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Her work on identifying bias in facial recognition has won quite a number of awards. Ground-breaking might be a strong word but it does move the industry forward.

Do you have a link to that paper? I'd like to read it, though I wasn't thrilled by the way she handled (or didn't) Yann LeCun.

You can see some of the recognition on her Wikipedia page:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timnit_Gebru

Re: We read the paper that forced Timnit Gebru out of Google

#219

Post by mikaeluman » Sat, Dec 05, 2020, 11:10 AM UTC

The problem I find with this has much to do with character. I will not comment on the research (because I do not know the field) but rather comment on why character matters and why motivation is important.

Having read her email and tweets; it is quite clear that she is as much a political activist for a far-left “woke” interpretation of the world that I view as of immediate threat to our way of living, democracy and free speech.

Of course you can still author great papers but you would be naive to expect her to reach any conclusion that goes against her political goals.

In her email she makes this clear. She even posts demands if her paper is not published. In her email she professes to being “dehumanized” for her color and makes it clear that - irrespective of any factors - hiring only 14% women in a year is not acceptable.

She continues to say that they had been “enough talking”. We need action.

This type of urgency to take action (of course only the actions she herself approves of) and stop talking are clear indications of a person who no longer lives by liberal values but has embraced an ideology to which they now belong.

At that point, as an employer of researchers, I would consider her credibility to be severely damaged. If at that point I receive demands from this person “or else”. Then I would of course also accept her resignation.

I think the tech industry will need to continue to stand up to the anti-liberal values of these “woke” people before they cause too much harm.

Re: We read the paper that forced Timnit Gebru out of Google

#220

Post by CyberRabbi » Sat, Dec 05, 2020, 11:11 AM UTC

lsiebert wrote: post #191

CyberRabbi wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah it seems like her paper was light in technical substance and high in social justice activism. Pointing out that google emits carbon is worth consideration in the appropriate venues but it doesn’t really advance the state of the art.

We haven't read her paper, just an article about it. We can't read it, because google won't let us. That you don't see that as a problem is a little concerning.

The article we are using as reference is a summary of her paper and is literally titled “we read [her] paper” from MIT Technology Review.

What do you suggest might the article be getting wrong about her paper? Or are you suggesting that the information contained about the paper in the article is inherently invalid and should be ignored altogether?