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

Tensions in Google's ethical AI group increase as it sends demands to CEO

cnn.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

281–290 of 460 posts

Re: Tensions in Google's ethical AI group increase as it sends demands to CEO

#281

Post by marmaduke »

shoo wrote: post #30

One thing I've wondered: what is the purpose of Google's ethical AI group? What utility does it provide to the corporation? I suspect the primary motivation for funding ethical AI work is _public relations_ (or less kindly, corporate propaganda) - to help mitigate damage to Google's brands and reputation by public concern surrounding artificial intelligence. It is well understood that it can be difficult to get someo…

Beyond PR, if all the ethical AI people work for Google and none for governments or other regulatory entities, then Google has cleared the path for themselves in terms of regulation or they will be able to run circles around whatever does come up.

Re: Tensions in Google's ethical AI group increase as it sends demands to CEO

#282

Post by igorkraw »

I find it sad that a good chunk of HN seems to just go with the "she's a toxic person" narrative without ever relaying what she actually DID. Ironically, the self identified "anti-SJW" are cancelling her by complaining about her "toxicity" and "attempts to cancel people" in vague terms.

I also find it sad that apparently, freedom of speech and free actions end when it comes to criticizing your employer in public, showing worker solidarity in public and asking for others to show their criticism in words and actions.

Re: Tensions in Google's ethical AI group increase as it sends demands to CEO

#283

Post by microtherion »

lawnchair_larry wrote: post #225
jasonvorhe wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's quite the statement considering that there's lots of PoC, women, queer people, sexual abuse victims, etc who have been suffering through toxic work environments for ages. What makes this group "the most toxic group" you've ever heard of?

Considering that she has started falsely calling her former coworkers including Jeff Dean a bunch of racists who fired her for being black, I’ll agree that she sounds extremely “toxic” and essentially impossible to have in your team. I don’t really understand where you get the idea that those minority groups have it any worse these days.

It appears that some people in her management hierarchy (notably NOT including her direct manager, who thought highly of her) found themselves in conflict with her. Her peers (which is more how I would generally define "coworker") appear to be backing her in this conflict, and blaming management as well.

A number of posters (mostly using throwaway accounts) are interpreting this as a group of fair and reasonable managers being beset by the most toxic team that ever toxied in the history of toxicity. I submit that the facts in evidence permit the opposite hypothesis: That it is Google that has difficulties living up to ethical standards of conduct, and that it is the management of the ethical AI team that is not living up to their professional responsibilities.

For all the posturing about Social Justice Warriors run amok, the idea that Google has some 'splaining to do about its conduct is not exactly confined to left wing circles, as evidenced e.g. by yesterday's lawsuit filed by Texas et al. And I suspect it's exactly this increased scrutiny that is leading to these ham-handed and probably counterproductive attempts to first hire "ethical AI" teams and then try to silence their output.

Re: Tensions in Google's ethical AI group increase as it sends demands to CEO

#284

Post by webmaven »

watisgoingon wrote: post #35
OneGuy123 wrote: post #5

Why is "black" being spelled with a capital "B"?

why is it even being mentioned? i miss hacker culture from the early internet, where it didnt matter your age, your sexuality, your "race"; we're all human beings :/ here's a conjecture: maybe racism is not real, maybe it's something that seems real but isn't, like "evil". it just seems so easy to find counterexamples to racist ideas. hate black people? surely i can introduce you to one who is pretty cool. hate white…

> it just seems so easy to find counterexamples to racist ideas. hate black people? surely i can introduce you to one who is pretty cool. hate whites? they aren't all bad.

The problem here is the presentation of a counterexample in this way is casting it as an exception, and implicitly confirming the validity of the negative stereotype as the default assumption:

This is also the underlying problem with certain compliments, eg. "Wow, you're a really good developer (unlike most women)!", "You're so well spoken (unlike most Black people)!", and so on.

Given the human ability to rationalize, even a never-ending flood of in-your-face counterexamples is more likely to provoke reactions like "Well, women are just less talented developers on average, of course there are exceptions", and so on.

Re: Tensions in Google's ethical AI group increase as it sends demands to CEO

#285

Post by cbozeman »

ntsplnkv2 wrote: post #255
cbozeman wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You'd be hard-pressed to find an ethical issue with how Edward Snowden handled the revelation of mass illegal spying on the American people. And I don't think anyone's disputing her desire to promote and encourage ethical implementations of AI technology. The crux of this issue is how you handle yourself, and it seems the more I read about how she handled these things, the more it seems like how children act. "If I d…

Again, if that were the case, there wouldn't be "tensions in google's ethical AI group." They're clearly unhappy, and so are many google employees. This clearly isn't just one person, this clearly is bigger than that. > You'd be hard-pressed to find an ethical issue with how Edward Snowden handled the revelation of mass illegal spying on the American people. What ethical issue is there with the revelation of problems…

The problem, as I stated in another comment, is that these people don't really understand what their job is and that's causing this confusion.

Their job is to build a bulwark for the company to guard it against negative press, and that will allow Google to create an AI that leverages all its data and currently existing infrastructure to increase shareholder value. They actually think their job is to prevent bad things from happening. Its not, and that's where the confusion is occurring. That confusion is turning into frustration, which in turn becomes anger.

You'll probably say something like, "Well that's a cynical viewpoint..."

Any company's "Ethics" committee/board is there to do that. Just like Human Resources is there to protect the company from you, not you from the company.

The only problem is that entirely too many Googlers think they're actually employed to make the world a better place. They're employed to create shareholder value. Sometimes making the world a better place will align with increasing shareholder value. Sometimes it won't.

Re: Tensions in Google's ethical AI group increase as it sends demands to CEO

#286

Post by lawnchair_larry »

matthewdgreen wrote: post #162
jjcon wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My employer asks me to change wording or add in bits of marketing fluff to my presentations all the time and I don’t go screaming to the hills for ‘compelled speech’. If you’re producing work on your companies dime it shouldn’t come as a surprise that they want you to represent the company well.

For Google, a huge percentage of the value in having an ethical AI division comes from having a credible and independent collection of experts who oversee the company's efforts. The minute that team ceases to be viewed as independent and credible, their value to Google is vastly diminished. What Google wants to say to the world is "hey, you should totally trust us, we have the best ethical AI people in the field look…

Is there any chance evidence to suggest that they hired Timnit merely as a PR show, rather than because they actually wanted a good product?

Although it’s fun to assume bad faith when it comes to every action by every company, she was not supposed to be an independent critic to launder evil. She was supposed to work in cooperation with them to make a high quality product. They don’t want to create something that causes suffering. Even if you don’t buy that their motivation was pure, doing so would obviously be bad for business. What good is a product that only works for white people?

Instead of adding perspective and cooperatively furthering a unified goal, she was divisive and created dysfunction.

She was in an incredibly privileged position to do good and shape the future of some civilization-changing technologies. Instead of shaping a better future, she threw hand grenades and stuck wrenches in gears. Now not only does the future of their tech lack her perspective, but they are unlikely to engage with anyone who even smells like they could be a bad-faith activist.

Re: Tensions in Google's ethical AI group increase as it sends demands to CEO

#287

Post by microtherion »

pron wrote: post #279
microtherion wrote: post #256

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> first try to change how Google behaves By, say, attempting to publish papers and have internal discussions about it?

I don't have all the facts here and neither, I believe, do you, and we don't know what recourses have been tried. My point is just that I find strange the view that the company is entitled to do anything as long as it's legal while employees aren't, and are expected to either leave or stay and shut up.

I think we're entirely in agreement on this. I would say that in all jobs, it's more honorable to first try to change the company rather than quit silently, but if your job description encompasses "ethics" or "compliance", it's pretty much a dereliction of duty to quit without even trying to change policies one finds wrong.

Re: Tensions in Google's ethical AI group increase as it sends demands to CEO

#288

Post by twcz »

I can't say I feel for Google, they've had it coming. A completely self-inflicted wound.

What worries me is the woke culture creeping over from Google to other companies, and from US to other countries. Demanding vice-presidents be fired, taking over companies like a virus.

But how can the virus stay alive while killing its hosts so vehemently? What will sustain it long-term?

Re: Tensions in Google's ethical AI group increase as it sends demands to CEO

#289

Post by dicomdan »

optimalsolver wrote: post #253

Funny how commenters here complain about Google's ethics on a daily basis, but as soon as people who don't look like the typical tech geek raise issues with the company, everyone jumps on Google's train.

It’a not about how they look, it’s about the disrespect they show towards fellow employees that makes working environment toxic for everyone else.

Re: Tensions in Google's ethical AI group increase as it sends demands to CEO

#290

Post by [deleted] »

googlethrow3134 wrote: post #223
motohagiography wrote: post #110

This issue reminds me a lot of what we do in security and privacy, which are ostensibly engineering disciplines, but are really technology governance functions. Ethical AI is also a governance function, and like hackers in security, there is an invisible yet stark limit to the value activists can provide in actual governance roles. Litigating demands is just not how governance gets done. The irony of Google hiring so…

[flagged]

[deleted]
Post reply on HN