Scientist is a stretch
More than 1,200 Google workers condemn firing of AI scientist Timnit Gebru
21–30 of 266 posts
Re: More than 1,200 Google workers condemn firing of AI scientist Timnit Gebru
#22I thought she offered her resignation and they accepted?
She offered to resign on a particular schedule to work out things with her team if they insisted on retracting the paper. They terminated her employment immediately, while she was on vacation, because of an email she sent to the ERG about it, and they didn't even inform her direct manager. Whatever they accepted, it wasn't the resignation she offered. (And even if they had done so, I expect the folks here to remain u…
> She offered to resign on a particular schedule
It is not out of the ordinary at all for companies to walk people out on the day of resignation. The company is not required or even expected to abide by whatever schedule is presented to them.
Re: More than 1,200 Google workers condemn firing of AI scientist Timnit Gebru
#23But how many applaud it? (In secret because supporting this is something you might get fired for...)
You might get fired for... supporting your bosses' decision to fire someone?
More like, you support the decision, but your immediate boss doesn't, so they start looking for reasons to get rid of you that don't have any official connection to your stance. I remember a while back seeing leaked documents from Google where some managers shared an unofficial blacklist of employees to never promote and try to get rid of because of their political views.
Re: More than 1,200 Google workers condemn firing of AI scientist Timnit Gebru
#24Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is not an example of "firing people that don't buy into the groupthink." She gave an ultimatum: either doxx the people who said her paper was unfit, or she quits. Google didn't give into her demands so accepted her resignation and moved her end date up because of her browbeating.
Wanting to know which coworkers are raising feedback in a process that does not provide for anonymous feedback in the first place is not "doxxing" them. (EDIT: Note that this particular process was not a peer review process - academic peer review is done by people from another institution , and selected by the venue after submitting a paper. This was a pre-submission internal review process which has never been bille…
> process that does not provide for anonymous feedback
What makes you say this? Ultimately, the process is determined by Google. She had managers say she couldn't get that information. Why wouldn't that be the end of the conversation with regards to their identities?
Re: More than 1,200 Google workers condemn firing of AI scientist Timnit Gebru
#25But how many applaud it? (In secret because supporting this is something you might get fired for...)
You might get fired for... supporting your bosses' decision to fire someone?
There is a strange thing in modern discourse where there is an advantage in first establishing yourself as a victim before making your point.
Re: More than 1,200 Google workers condemn firing of AI scientist Timnit Gebru
#26I find the semi-regular condemnations from employees of big tech companies hollow. If you work for one of these companies and find their behavior unsavory, go work somewhere else - this is actually what might cause executives at these companies to reflect on how they might change course.
The fact that most of these employees could easily get well paying (just not as _ridiculously well paying_) jobs elsewhere to me feels like they are not staying out of necessity, rather they are looking to assuage their conscious through statements like these, and continue collecting their exorbitant pay.
Re: More than 1,200 Google workers condemn firing of AI scientist Timnit Gebru
#27Threatening to leave is often times the ONLY leverage a worker has. What other leverage can a human utilize, in order to get their concerns addressed?
And how seriously does Google managers really take AI ethics, when they fail to resolve such an issue internally?
This is troublesome on so many levels and a huge red flag anything to do with AI and Google.
Re: More than 1,200 Google workers condemn firing of AI scientist Timnit Gebru
#28She gave her employer an ultimatum, threatening to quit if she didn't get her way. They called her bluff. I don't see how that is the same as being fired. At that point she was on her way out, one way or another; most employers would rather not work with people like this.
I think the subtle, yet important, difference is that she said she would quit by a certain date and they terminated her immediately. Given her role is likely just for PR it seems rather foolish not to at least give her two weeks notice or something.
This isn't at all unusual when someone is quitting on bad terms, is it?
Re: More than 1,200 Google workers condemn firing of AI scientist Timnit Gebru
#29She gave her employer an ultimatum, threatening to quit if she didn't get her way. They called her bluff. I don't see how that is the same as being fired. At that point she was on her way out, one way or another; most employers would rather not work with people like this.
So if you don’t do what your boss says at a job, even if you disagree, your boss can fire you, and this is good. But if you tell your boss that they should do something or you’ll quit, this is bad and makes you unemployable.
You realize that this is just an argument that whoever is in a position of authority over you is right by virtue of having that authority?
Re: More than 1,200 Google workers condemn firing of AI scientist Timnit Gebru
#30Earlier quoted context omitted.
You might get fired for... supporting your bosses' decision to fire someone?
Some people have a stance they chose, that this is some Daily Mail "political correctness gone mad" thing, because SJW cultural domination controls all our lives. They're working through some cognitive dissonance.
It does though. For instance, were any articles framed as [More than X Google workers condemn firing of James Damore], despite that actually being the case? The media, universities and other elite institutions always support the "SJW cultural domination" stance on all these issues and the discussion is always framed from that perspective.
You'll find similar framings such as [More than X GitHub workers condemn GitHub's deals with ICE]. You'll never find [More than X GitHub workers condemn removal of meritocracy rug], despite that also being the case. You may not like me pointing this out, but that's how it happens. It's not cognitive dissonance to see that that's how these things go.