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

Google CEO pledges to investigate exit of top AI ethicist

axios.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 104 posts

Re: Google CEO pledges to investigate exit of top AI ethicist

#51

Post by pseingatl »

Three times he uses the word "departure" as if this were her decision. The last reference uses the word "left," reinforcing the position that Google didn't fire her.

Have no doubt: this CYA text was massaged and went through several HR and in-house GC revisions, and maybe even a few round-trips to outside labor litigation counsel.

In other words, this statement is pure CYA and litigation-defensive. They're terrified of a racial discrimination lawsuit.

I hope that Timnit can find her way to the courthouse. I'd love to cross-examine Pichai with this statement in hand. He would deny that these were his words. He would say that he would have expressed it differently. He would say that he wasn't involved with the firing decision: every time the question is asked, the noun used is "termination" and not departure.

The only question remaining, assuming Timnit does file, is quanta of damages.

Re: Google CEO pledges to investigate exit of top AI ethicist

#52

Post by pseingatl »

hpoe wrote: post #10

It seems to me like we have two different people arguing about 2 (maybe 3) completely different things when it comes to this Gebru situation. 1 - Google fired Gebru for trying to push a paper that presented google in a negative light. Doing so by creating special magic policies for her and then telling her she was fired. The concern in this case appears to be the fact that Google is suppressing criticism and ignoring…

RE: the above: I see that HR has weighed in.

Re: Google CEO pledges to investigate exit of top AI ethicist

#53

Post by babesh »

This is a power conflict between the capitalists and the social justice warriors.

The last several years, the SJWs have progressively increased their power. The capitalists have adopted the clothing so that their power isn’t undermined.

The SJWs are seeing how much further they can push. The capitalists are deciding what trinkets they can give away without relinquishing real power.

Eventually, the SJWs will be paid off, destroyed, win completely, or gain seats on the table and then it will be in their interests to preserve the power structure and oppress another group of people.

Look at the Biden cabinet as seats on the table for groups that play nice with the Democratic Party or those that they want to court.

Re: Google CEO pledges to investigate exit of top AI ethicist

#54

Post by pseingatl »

metabagel wrote: post #40
roenxi wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> ...based on her emails and tweets she does indeed seem like an incredibly toxic personality and I sure wouldn't want to work anywhere near her... I agree I wouldn't want her reporting to me, but is it really that hard to fire someone in California? From the outside Google management seems to endorse solidly left-leaning politics, so while anything is possible it seems unlikely that they objected to her views or act…

Employment in California is “at will”, meaning that absent extenuating circumstances (such as a written contract) either the employee or the employer can terminate the relationship at any time, without cause. So, it’s not hard to terminate someone in California, but nonetheless employers are hesitant to terminate employees without cause, probably for fear of being sued. I think it has to do with lawsuits being highly…

It is illegal to fire someone based on race-based considerations.

Re: Google CEO pledges to investigate exit of top AI ethicist

#55

Post by pseingatl »

busterarm wrote: post #36
roenxi wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> ...based on her emails and tweets she does indeed seem like an incredibly toxic personality and I sure wouldn't want to work anywhere near her... I agree I wouldn't want her reporting to me, but is it really that hard to fire someone in California? From the outside Google management seems to endorse solidly left-leaning politics, so while anything is possible it seems unlikely that they objected to her views or act…

Google can afford lawyers and PR to deal with an employment lawsuit but a lot of smaller companies don't feel like they can. I had an experience once where a toxic, delusional, pathological liar of an employee was hired and started making up wild accusations about their coworkers on day 1. They then proceeded to do no work and had their role at the company progressively minimized so that they could have satisfactory…

The solution to dealing with such a person is a transfer, TDY for successive three month periods around the country (including Alaska in the winter), requiring reimbursement of hotel bills (i.e., no cash advance). You'll find the disgruntled employee resigns quickly, usually after the first safari.

Re: Google CEO pledges to investigate exit of top AI ethicist

#56

Post by bartvk »

pseingatl wrote: post #51

Three times he uses the word "departure" as if this were her decision. The last reference uses the word "left," reinforcing the position that Google didn't fire her. Have no doubt: this CYA text was massaged and went through several HR and in-house GC revisions, and maybe even a few round-trips to outside labor litigation counsel. In other words, this statement is pure CYA and litigation-defensive. They're terrified…

It looks to be partly her decision, if I'm reading The Verge correctly:

"After the email went out, Gebru told managers that certain conditions had to be met in order for her to stay at the company. Otherwise, she would have to work on a transition plan."

https://www.theverge.com/2020/12/3/22150355/google-fires-tim...

Re: Google CEO pledges to investigate exit of top AI ethicist

#57

Post by malcolmgreaves »

bra-ket wrote: post #50
almost_usual wrote: post #35

> Cynthia Yeung, an industry veteran who spent five years at Google, put it bluntly: "Maybe the trade-off should be more clearly spelled out so researchers can make informed decisions before they accept a job offer: You get paid academic salaries in exchange for intellectual freedom, and you get paid Silicon Valley salaries in exchange for allowing your name/likeness to be used for brand/PR purposes and your research…

this case had nothing to do with censorship though. It was Gebru' unprofessional conduct - she gave ultimatum to her managers demanding to disclose names of the reviewers who criticized her work or she would resign, and broadcasting emails to entire team literally calling for sabotage. Her behavior fits the definition of 'toxic employee', it was unprofessional by any standard. Here is Jeff Dean's letter sent to the G…

> Here is Jeff Dean's letter sent to the Google Research team with the details of what actually happened: :https://docs.google.com/document/d/1f2kYWDXwhzYnq8ebVtuk9CqQ...

You choose to trust the words of the man that did the firing vs. the corroborated stories of dozens of Google Brain researchers that contradict his corporate messaging. Don't take corporate's word as "what happened:" that's about as naive as taking a police's side as the "truth."

Re: Google CEO pledges to investigate exit of top AI ethicist

#58

Post by thrweor234324 »

niij wrote: post #46
Ansil849 wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> doxed by New York Times. Are you thinking of any specific case where the Times doxed someone for practicing intellectual freedom?

https://slatestarcodex.com/2020/06/22/nyt-is-threatening-my-...

More like New Reich Times.

Re: Google CEO pledges to investigate exit of top AI ethicist

#59

Post by pseingatl »

academicthrow wrote: post #37
warriorstar wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can't possibly be for real. You don't know her qualifications, so you assume she doesn't have any. Then you come up with a straw-man of "non-engineers lacking skills" and assign that to her! You're more willing to assign traits you made up to her than look up what she's actually capable of!

If you've been in academia for awhile you've seen this happen time and time again. Student does excellently in undergrad, masters, phd coursework* but when it comes to making real technical contributions, they hit a wall. It was a clever move by her to use her pedigree to pivot into "AI ethics" where the standards for publishing are much lower (as we can see from this draft that was circulated). *Given her background…

This is an outrageous racist statement in itself. The idea that she reached her position because of AA is unbelievable. Getting into Google isn't easy, and the company doesn't give a rat's ass about diversity, HR statements and pablum notwithstanding.

If any company has a reputation for hiring only talented people, it's Google. She got her position based on merit, like the overwhelming majority of Google employees.

Post reply on HN