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

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

cnbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 179 posts

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

#161

Post by oh_sigh »

microtherion wrote: post #135
Scea91 wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

From what I have read about the affair, e.g. the latest "setting the record straight" blog post linked from the article, I have strong reasons to believe that the paper in question: 1. Did in fact go through and pass the internal approval process that he implied it didn't. 2. Was then subjected to a second, intransparent "review" that is not customary practice at Google. 3. The results of that "review" were presented…

Those 4 points are all theories of yours - I wonder - where does Timnit's previous employment at Google and published papers fit into the theory? Why would they publish multiple of her papers on basically the same exact subject, but then decide they need to stop her at all costs for this paper?

Did Jeff Dean think Timnit was a white dude and so let her publish, but when he found out she was a brown woman, he said he cannot stand for this?

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

#162

Post by [deleted] »

dragonwriter wrote: post #155
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?

> This should be handled internally and not aired in public across several media sites. When the triggering event involved a collaboration involving non-Google parties, that became pretty much impossible. > Why should I care about the dirty laundry of FAANG and some random individual? Maybe you shouldn't, but not everyone outside of Google is you. Other people in the field of AI ethics might want to know, because Goo…

[deleted]

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

#163

Post by systemBuilder »

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?

You have no idea how legal battles are won! They are one in the court of public opinion!

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

#164

Post by systemBuilder »

kd913 wrote: post #99
jasonwatkinspdx wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm pretty sure you know the name Jeff Dean, who seems to have taken a personal role in this drama. It's rather telling that your entire perspective is to demonize and diminish Gebru, who you don't even bother to name in your criticisms. Why are you trying to establish some "level" distinction between Damore and Gebru. These aren't even remotely comparable situations. Public attention and scrutiny is why we're talkin…

I didn't know who Jeff Dean is, other than the fact that he is another AI researcher at Google. My work involves low-latency network drivers, not at all the field of AI. Fine, there are AI stars too, but the article could lead about what they have done and why they are important no? A discussion involving Jim Keller would lead to his contributions to x86, Apple A10 series, Tesla chips and Zen. I don't want a hand wav…

Jeff Dean invented BigTable that powers search, was a main author of the Google Mapreduce paper, and invented the tech that took Google translate from 85% accuracy to 96%. He is a big deal, bigger than linus, keller, kodhuri combined. The latter 3 make incremental changes whereas Dean is known for revolutionary discoveries (okay not StuckTable).

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

#165

Post by microtherion »

oh_sigh wrote: post #161
microtherion wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From what I have read about the affair, e.g. the latest "setting the record straight" blog post linked from the article, I have strong reasons to believe that the paper in question: 1. Did in fact go through and pass the internal approval process that he implied it didn't. 2. Was then subjected to a second, intransparent "review" that is not customary practice at Google. 3. The results of that "review" were presented…

Those 4 points are all theories of yours - I wonder - where does Timnit's previous employment at Google and published papers fit into the theory? Why would they publish multiple of her papers on basically the same exact subject, but then decide they need to stop her at all costs for this paper? Did Jeff Dean think Timnit was a white dude and so let her publish, but when he found out she was a brown woman, he said he…

> Those 4 points are all theories of yours

These 4 points were all taken from the blog post I referenced, which I found well documented and thus credible:

https://googlewalkout.medium.com/setting-the-record-straight...

> Why would they publish multiple of her papers on basically the same exact subject, but then decide they need to stop her at all costs for this paper?

You tell me. If they were truly on "basically the same exact subject", there can't really be a scientific explanation for some to be publishable and others not, can there?

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

#166

Post by totalZero »

BeetleB wrote: post #33
shkkmo wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If someone says "if you don't fix this thing I will look for work elsewhere" that doesn't mean that you can say "I accept your resignation." If you want that person gone immediately, you have to fire them.

> If someone says "if you don't fix this thing I will look for work elsewhere" that doesn't mean that you can say "I accept your resignation." I think you'll find from a legal standpoint, it does.[1] At least I know that they teach in negotiations courses that any time you make a counteroffer , the original offer is legally null and void. So if I give you an employment offer that is good for 30 days, and you counter…

The difference between being fired and resigning isn't moot, even in an at-will job where the employer can fire you without cause or explanation. How/why you departed can affect your severance, unemployment insurance, and other financial considerations. In some industries, it may also affect the report submitted to an industry regulator.

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

#167

Post by tb303 »

throwaway19937 wrote: post #132
tb303 wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Timnit's position is a direct result of her actions and internal reputation at Google. No one forced her to do any of the following things: 1. Griping about the racist reviewers of her paper on Twitter. 2. Sending an email to a internal list criticizing Google's behavior and telling people to stop working on diversity. 3. Demanding the names of reviewers and threatening to resign if they weren't provided. #2 or #3 wo…

even if i agreed with you about some of those points (and i worked at google 2013-2015, internally criticized many of their processes, and was lectured about "my place" at google), everything you said is independent of reading into someone's motives. you're arguing with a point i am not making at all and trivializing the abuse timnit subjects herself to in going public with this.

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

#168

Post by joshxyz »

okareaman wrote: post #59

There's was an incident a while back where 2 engineers were joking between themselves about a "big dongle" and the woman seated in the row ahead heard it, turn around, took their picture and posted it online. It ruined everyone's life including hers. I thought we learned from this that airing things publicly is fraught with danger. I imagine there is a time and place for it, but very carefully with intention. https:/…

Oh man what a classic

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

#169

Post by oh_sigh »

microtherion wrote: post #165
oh_sigh wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those 4 points are all theories of yours - I wonder - where does Timnit's previous employment at Google and published papers fit into the theory? Why would they publish multiple of her papers on basically the same exact subject, but then decide they need to stop her at all costs for this paper? Did Jeff Dean think Timnit was a white dude and so let her publish, but when he found out she was a brown woman, he said he…

> Those 4 points are all theories of yours These 4 points were all taken from the blog post I referenced, which I found well documented and thus credible: https://googlewalkout.medium.com/setting-the-record-straight... > Why would they publish multiple of her papers on basically the same exact subject, but then decide they need to stop her at all costs for this paper? You tell me. If they were truly on "basically the…

> If they were truly on "basically the same exact subject", there can't really be a scientific explanation for some to be publishable and others not, can there

Or, your theories are flawed in some manner and don't actually capture the truth. I'm asking you how previous behavior would fit into the theories that you yourself believe.

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

#170

Post by raxxorrax »

actuator wrote: post #44
prodtorok wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think it's as innocent as "loves the fame" ... there is a greater theme in our society regarding the influence of public opinion; and how influencers are abusing that in politics/positions of power. The media of course enables it, which I think is a sign of a growing, large scale, rational fragility across society (demand controls their publication, there is a large demand for this type of information)

FB gets criticized a lot in HN but Twitter isn't. IMO Twitter is absolutely the worst platform for things like these because of the prevalent mob culture. It is very easy to organise people using your influence and they can easily hound out any dissenting opinion. I will have to search for them now but I saw people doxxing some of the current Googler's identities if they agreed with the resignation. This is extremely…

Mob culture didn't start with Twitter though. It was just not as effective before social media when people were anonymous. At least in most cases.

Now social media sites encourage people being public figures, which is an insanely bad advice for the vast majority of individuals.

Post reply on HN