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

Margaret Mitchell fired from Google

axios.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 864 posts

Re: Margaret Mitchell fired from Google

#91

Post by bpodgursky »

lmilcin wrote: post #72
khazhoux wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Releasing even a single internal document without permission is cause for firing, and possible legal action. I can't even fathom this being up for debate.

Not necessarily. Google's US-based employees would be protected by Sarbanes-Oxley Act if they did it to report on fraud. But generally, yes. Unless you have a truly extraordinary reason you can get easily fired in most companies.

Disclosing documents to a federal investigator (or regulator) is wildly different than sending it to an ex-coworker.

Re: Margaret Mitchell fired from Google

#92

Post by uncledave »

andyxor wrote: post #6

Google response (from Jan): "Our security systems automatically lock an employee’s corporate account when they detect that the account is at risk of compromise due to credential problems or when an automated rule involving the handling of sensitive data has been triggered. In this instance, yesterday our systems detected that an account had exfiltrated thousands of files and shared them with multiple external account…

AI system fires AI ethics leader? Hmm this wasn't the machine uprising I was expecting.

Re: Margaret Mitchell fired from Google

#93

Post by throwaway0a5e »

anothernewdude wrote: post #89

They'll find a yes-man eventually

Or they'll just conclude the whole thing was a waste and only caused negative publicity and hard feelings and have legal and PR and relevant stakeholders from any given project manage ethics going forward like normal BigCos do.

Re: Margaret Mitchell fired from Google

#94

Post by sillysaurusx »

It's pretty important to get this story straight: She moved files when she wasn't supposed to. This seems like a pretty standard firing. People are already claiming on twitter that Google is assaulting ethical AI, and I just don't see it.

Google did not immediately comment on those claims. Its statement said of Mitchell: “We confirmed that there were multiple violations of our code of conduct, as well as of our security policies, which included the exfiltration of confidential business-sensitive documents and private data of other employees.”

Yeah, uh, don't do this.

Re: Margaret Mitchell fired from Google

#95

Post by elefanten »

sillysaurusx wrote: post #94

It's pretty important to get this story straight: She moved files when she wasn't supposed to. This seems like a pretty standard firing. People are already claiming on twitter that Google is assaulting ethical AI, and I just don't see it. Google did not immediately comment on those claims. Its statement said of Mitchell: “We confirmed that there were multiple violations of our code of conduct, as well as of our secur…

Not just exfiltration but sharing outside the organization, as per news articles about it.

There's no story here, this is an obvious outcome.

Edit: to add that the more interesting question is whether they should sue her. If they don't, that may be the contextually-appropriate version of letting her off the hook easy (to live up to their culture or for morale or for optics or whatever reason).

Re: Margaret Mitchell fired from Google

#96

Post by yellow_postit »

sillysaurusx wrote: post #94

It's pretty important to get this story straight: She moved files when she wasn't supposed to. This seems like a pretty standard firing. People are already claiming on twitter that Google is assaulting ethical AI, and I just don't see it. Google did not immediately comment on those claims. Its statement said of Mitchell: “We confirmed that there were multiple violations of our code of conduct, as well as of our secur…

Wonder if there will be some big leak or bus throwing article from the exfiltrated data the reporting references.

Re: Margaret Mitchell fired from Google

#97

Post by chronic3802 »

- 135,000 Google employees

- 2,000 signed a petition to support Timnit [1]

- 2 employees resigned to support Timnit [2]

When it comes to voting with your feet, no one actually gives a shit.

[1] https://www.cnbc.com/2020/12/04/thousands-petition-google-fo...

[2] https://www.cnn.com/2021/02/04/tech/google-employees-quit/in...

Re: Margaret Mitchell fired from Google

#98

Post by mtgx »

throwaway0a5e wrote: post #93
anothernewdude wrote: post #89

They'll find a yes-man eventually

Or they'll just conclude the whole thing was a waste and only caused negative publicity and hard feelings and have legal and PR and relevant stakeholders from any given project manage ethics going forward like normal BigCos do.

Let's be real. The whole idea of this "Ethics Board" was only ever done for PR. Period.

Google never actually intended to follow through with any of their recommendations if it meant going against its financial interests.

Re: Margaret Mitchell fired from Google

#99

Post by duckfang »

At the same time, Google unveiled a "Black owned businesses near me" on Google Maps. How has that been received? We need look no further than Twitter: (the Tl;Dr. racists are using this to lower all ratings of these Black owned businesses)

https://twitter.com/dmetaxak/status/1362856231212212224

Google recently added a feature allowing users to search for "Black-owned businesses near you". They're advertising it all over the place (see below).

I've also already started hearing from Black-owned businesses I follow that they're seeing an influx of racist fake reviews...

BLK MKT Vintage, for instance, got over 30 new, clearly fake reviews in 24 hours (e.g., calling them "a store that promotes segregation", saying their items were "broken" and "covered in dead cockroaches").

And if you look at the users writing those reviews...

The users leaving those fraudulent 1-star reviews for this business are also leaving 1-star reviews on dozens of other Black-owned businesses.

All this while Google pays for PR lauding this new feature.

We need to ask: is it always a good idea to make marginalized groups more visible? Whom does it benefit?

Have such companies thought through the consequences for those they're "helping"? Was this done at the direction of those groups or paternalistically on behalf of?

This is yet another example of why app features cannot and should not replace community networks and mutual aid.

Technosolutionism, the white savior complex, and paternalism towards marginalized groups lead to selfish PR efforts that actively harm those they ostensibly "help".

Re: Margaret Mitchell fired from Google

#100

Post by jimbob45 »

rmk wrote: post #75
xiaolingxiao wrote: post #19

She gave a talk at my school once, she was invited by my then advisor. This was in 2017 right after she left MSR. We had a brief change, and even back then you can tell she’s not into kowtowing to the patriarchy. It’s quite hard for ambitious women in compsci, they have to walk a tight edge between firm and “motherly”. Men have no such constraints. —————————————— Clarification: I’m speaking about women researchers in…

I have heard that academic departments literally bend over backwards to cultivate women as professors and extend every possible advantage to them in order to promote them. This is from a classmate who did her PhD and is now a tenure-track professor at a prominent school. I know for a fact that she was also the recipients of various scholarships, grants etc. while she was in school, many of which she attributed to bei…

+1 to this. On my very first day of my very first CS class in college over 10 years ago, a guest speaker came in to beg to take girls to an all expenses paid conference about women in CS. I was never afforded a similar opportunity.
Post reply on HN