Google employees say AI researcher did not resign, despite what exec claims • Hacker News Board

Re: Google employees say AI researcher did not resign, despite what exec claims

#121

Post by apta » Mon, Dec 07, 2020, 9:16 PM UTC

microtherion wrote: post #100

apta wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly the case. Plus, I'd trust someone like Jeff Dean who is accomplished and does not have a history of crying racism and "microagressions" at the slightest beurocratic issue. There are already a couple of posts on reddit from ex-colleagues who explained what it was like working with people like her. People are tired of "woke"ness.

It’s easier not to complain about behavior if you’re the perpetrator, rather than the recipient, of the behavior. I bet Jeffrey Dahmer didn’t have a history of complaining about cannibalism either, but that doesn’t necessarily make him the good guy.

Looking at someone's history is a good indicator. Hasn't she already threatened to sue Google barely a few months into her job? If so, I don't blame them for letting her go at the soonest possible time. She gave them the opportunity, and it was only smart of them to take it.

Re: Google employees say AI researcher did not resign, despite what exec claims

#122

Post by chafporte » Mon, Dec 07, 2020, 9:20 PM UTC

6gvONxR4sf7o wrote: post #104

This whole question of resigned or fired seems like such a weird one. It's getting so much debate! I think everybody understands that she gave an ultimatum that included a "or else I will resign." I think everybody understands that Google responded with a "you are out as of now" that took her by surprise. And yet there are a bazillion articles debating what verb best describes that pair of events. I get that there is…

Did she actually resign ? No. As she didn't resign, was she fired ? Yes. The only issue is Google lying about it.

Re: Google employees say AI researcher did not resign, despite what exec claims

#123

Post by bJGVygG7MQVF8c » Mon, Dec 07, 2020, 9:22 PM UTC

Lol. Yes, fair headline, she resigned. It's right there in the piece:

> “Dr. Gebru did not resign [...] Dr. Gebru has stated this plainly, and others have meticulously documented it,” the Walkout group wrote in Monday’s blog post.[1]

Translation:

"She didn't resign — she said she didn't resign. She told us so."

The logocentrism of the midwit elite.

That "meticulous documentation" that was mentioned:

> Expressed intent to resign - provided date + immediate termination = legally fired in the state of California.[2]

These people are grindingly stupid.

[1]: https://www.cnbc.com/2020/12/07/google-employees-dispute-jef... [2]: https://twitter.com/rajiinio/status/1335410735929765891

Re: Google employees say AI researcher did not resign, despite what exec claims

#124

Post by NearAP » Mon, Dec 07, 2020, 9:24 PM UTC

sorenjan wrote: post #45

hartator wrote: post #3

Didn’t she gave an ultimatum? Do this or I resign? And they are like we can’t do this so we consider you terminated?

My uninformed interpretation is that Google wanted her gone and jumped at the first opportunity they got. If they wanted her around I don't think the reasons they've given for letting her go would have been dealbreakers.

Technically speaking, how is that a problem? If your theory is right that Google was looking for a reason to fire her, then she shouldn't have given them a 'legal' one. At the end of the day, it boiled down to - she gave them an ultimatum and they called her bluff (this has nothing to do with whether her reasons were right or wrong; if her reasons were right and she really didn't want believe she could work under such conditions, then the focus of her statement and public debate should be about that and not whether Google fired her or she resigned.

Re: Google employees say AI researcher did not resign, despite what exec claims

#125

Post by apta » Mon, Dec 07, 2020, 9:24 PM UTC

xadhominemx wrote: post #119

apta wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hopefully it's a lesson for other companies to be very careful for hiring "woke" SJW's after seeing the chaos they're causing.

Much of what was regarded as “woke SJW nonsense” 15 years ago is now completely mainstream. I’m sure even you — who clearly has some preoccupation with progressive social thought as you post on about “SJWs” multiple times per day on average — have some beliefs that would have been considered insufferably woke and obnoxious by people like you in 2003.

> 15 years ago is now completely mainstream

Such as? Furthermore, I don't care about mainstream, a lot of mainstream stuff today is trash honestly.

> have some beliefs that would have been considered insufferably woke and obnoxious by people like you in 2003

My basis has been consistent for over 1400 years now.

Re: Google employees say AI researcher did not resign, despite what exec claims

#126

Post by NearAP » Mon, Dec 07, 2020, 9:30 PM UTC

KittenInABox wrote: post #20

tantalor wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The following are equivalent: - I will look for work elsewhere - I will work on a last date - My last date is - This job isn't working out - I don't want to work here anymore - I offer my resignation - I quit

I've stated before that I don't want to work at a job without intending to actually leave the job or having a last date. In those cases I was venting and was burnt out. I've even admitted this to managers I could trust to talk about how to unburn me instead of declaring I've 'resigned', because I bring a lot of value to teams I'm on.

The key here is that you were venting to 'managers you could trust about feeling burnt out'. If you were talking to a manager who didn't see this as just 'venting', nothing stops them from accepting your resignation.

Re: Google employees say AI researcher did not resign, despite what exec claims

#127

Post by Scea91 » Mon, Dec 07, 2020, 9:30 PM UTC

microtherion wrote: post #100

apta wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly the case. Plus, I'd trust someone like Jeff Dean who is accomplished and does not have a history of crying racism and "microagressions" at the slightest beurocratic issue. There are already a couple of posts on reddit from ex-colleagues who explained what it was like working with people like her. People are tired of "woke"ness.

It’s easier not to complain about behavior if you’re the perpetrator, rather than the recipient, of the behavior. I bet Jeffrey Dahmer didn’t have a history of complaining about cannibalism either, but that doesn’t necessarily make him the good guy.

Based on what exactly do you imply that Jeff Dean is a perpetrator of racism? Because he is a white dude? Isn't that ironic?

Re: Google employees say AI researcher did not resign, despite what exec claims

#128

Post by VikingCoder » Mon, Dec 07, 2020, 9:31 PM UTC

tantalor wrote: post #49

VikingCoder wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"My last date is , BECAUSE I'M RETIRING." If you immediately fire someone for that, that may be illegal age discrimination. Cheers.

I didn't say anything about "immediately firing" anybody, cheers.

When someone says "I quit," (which you equated it to) I stop paying their paycheck.

What do you do?

Re: Google employees say AI researcher did not resign, despite what exec claims

#129

Post by lawnchair_larry » Mon, Dec 07, 2020, 9:36 PM UTC

motoboi wrote: post #52

kd913 wrote: post #12

It disturbs me how much of a news story this is. This should be handled internally and not aired in public across several media sites. Why should I care about the dirty laundry of FAANG and some random individual?

Because she is was an ethicist in google, an AI company. People are very afraid that google fired her because they don't care about bias and unethical use in AI. So, for us that care about google's use of AI and ethical use of it, it's important to understand what happened.

This is not logical at all and seems either completely hysterical or deliberately malicious.

If Google fires a janitor, does that mean they don’t care about a clean work environment? If they fire a VP of engineering, does that mean they don’t care about engineering?

No, it means that person didn’t work out. And considering how she is handling it by going nuclear with the press and the twitter mobbing, I for one am not the least bit surprised.

Re: Google employees say AI researcher did not resign, despite what exec claims

#130

Post by lawnchair_larry » Mon, Dec 07, 2020, 9:39 PM UTC

tb303 wrote: post #91

gerash wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Obviously the individual who was let go loves the fame but I see most news website are pretty much looking for some sensational story to run mainly because doing more thorough analysis doesn't pay for itself. That's the problem.

Just a nudge from a stranger: Please take a moment to consider the extremely difficult position "the individual" may be in, the frustrations leading up to this, and the possible negative impact this has on their career that they had to weigh before naively thinking that they "love the fame." that's gamergate mentality in action and will work against you.

So you’re saying it’s actually about ethics in AI? ;)