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

After DeepMind’s cofounder was placed on leave for bullying, Google promoted him

morningbrew.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 349 posts

Re: After DeepMind’s cofounder was placed on leave for bullying, Google promoted him

#131

Post by mach_architect »

random314 wrote: post #58

Just looking at Suleymans credentials, he has literally zero technical credentials. Why is he leading AI divisions within Google? Because he managed to become Demis Hassabis' lackey at the right time? Looks like a standard issue corporate climber who demands work from his subordinates that he himself cannot deliver.

> he has literally zero technical credentials

> Looks like a standard issue corporate climber who demands work from his subordinates that he himself cannot deliver.

The people I've seen like this had machine learning PHDs and lots of publications, while some of the most productive had no such pedigree. I'd be careful judging based on "technical credentials".

Re: After DeepMind’s cofounder was placed on leave for bullying, Google promoted him

#132

Post by edgyquant »

geofft wrote: post #121
TeMPOraL wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Were they bad architects though? It's easy to paint bad managers as bad workers (or even bad people ) - but sometimes, they're just bad at managing. In such cases, it's better to shift them into roles they're more suited for than to fire them and hire new people for those roles - existing employees already know the company's procedures and products. Plus, it'll likely be cheaper salary-wise - in our industry, new emp…

How can you possibly be a good architect if you're a bad manager? Every skill of a good manager - having good working relationships and pleasant interpersonal relations, understanding conflicting needs from different teams, building trust, being able to schedule and prioritize work, etc. - is also a skill of a good architect. If you're off in a corner developing things by yourself, you're not an architect, you're an…

I think it’s pretty straightforward. When we’re young we often see friends, at our early jobs, who are good workers but get promoted and become mean + stop working as hard. Some people just aren’t good at managing other people but are still skilled at their trade.

Re: After DeepMind’s cofounder was placed on leave for bullying, Google promoted him

#133

Post by edgyquant »

ATsch wrote: post #113
TeMPOraL wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Were they bad architects though? It's easy to paint bad managers as bad workers (or even bad people ) - but sometimes, they're just bad at managing. In such cases, it's better to shift them into roles they're more suited for than to fire them and hire new people for those roles - existing employees already know the company's procedures and products. Plus, it'll likely be cheaper salary-wise - in our industry, new emp…

Sorry, but a good architect bully is not a bit better than a bad manager bully.

You can tell the architect with no power over you to, politely, go fuck themselves. You can not do this to your manager.

Re: After DeepMind’s cofounder was placed on leave for bullying, Google promoted him

#134

Post by truetraveller »

ATsch wrote: post #112
oytis wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a total mystery to me why do people feel the urge to defend him. I kind of understand this in the case of technically brilliant but socially awkward people, but this guy seems to have done nothing but management in his life. And if this is how he's doing management then I don't understand why he's tolerated at all.

My unfortunate conclusion is that a large portion of people in this industry are either like this or wish they could get away with being like this. The amount of people who always reply about how they don't see any issues is enough proof of that.

Nah. These accusations are exaggerated and without proof. Put yourself in his shoes. Would you like random internet people to accuse you with dramatized statements and/or exaggerations?

Re: After DeepMind’s cofounder was placed on leave for bullying, Google promoted him

#135

Post by IfOnlyYouKnew »

oytis wrote: post #88
sillysaurusx wrote: post #16

I see a lot of people saying this seems not a big deal, or that his leadership deserved promotion. It’s because this is a second order article. The original, most substantive source that I could find is quite thorough: https://archive.is/wqdkF > "He would ask us to do personal things for him," one of these people said. "He said, 'I need you to write a briefing for me on Russian history and politics.' [...] We had abs…

It's a total mystery to me why do people feel the urge to defend him. I kind of understand this in the case of technically brilliant but socially awkward people, but this guy seems to have done nothing but management in his life. And if this is how he's doing management then I don't understand why he's tolerated at all.

It's a culture war thing... HN believes that capabilities tend to be zero-sum, and any character flaws are evidence of genius in other regards. The "brilliant but eccentric scientist" cliché, more or less.

There's also an unwillingness to either consider the concept of "bullying" as real, because it's not easily quantified and/or defined in such a way that you could spot it in a single-page flowchart. Or a learnt defense to immediately show solidarity with any bully so as to avoid being targeted.

There might be hints of what's sometimes referred to as "toxic masculinity" in there, as well. This exec's mistake, resulting in less than overwhelming support here, was not to get accused of sexual harassment.

Re: After DeepMind’s cofounder was placed on leave for bullying, Google promoted him

#137

Post by mLuby »

truetraveller wrote: post #129
oytis wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a total mystery to me why do people feel the urge to defend him. I kind of understand this in the case of technically brilliant but socially awkward people, but this guy seems to have done nothing but management in his life. And if this is how he's doing management then I don't understand why he's tolerated at all.

We're defending him because the accusations against him are egregiously exaggerated, and without proof. I'm against screaming, but infrequent/involuntary screaming by a very senior exec does happen, and in my opinion, cannot be called abusive. In fact, I would be upset if I had a sheep for an exec. I want a exec who is kind, and who can lead and is firm. Not screaming, but almost there.

> screaming by a very senior exec is common place and cannot be called abusive

It is possible that what's been acceptable for a long time is no longer okay. At the very least, I'd say tantrum are unprofessional; After all, if the exec is losing their shit over something minor, how can I trust them to keep a level head if things really get challenging? But maybe some people respond better to the stick than to the carrot, or to a reasoned explanation of why the cart needs to go to market.

Re: After DeepMind’s cofounder was placed on leave for bullying, Google promoted him

#138

Post by vmception »

prepend wrote: post #4

This article leaves out why he was promoted. I assume he was promoted despite the discipline, not as a reward. The article doesn’t research whether he’s reformed or still a bully. Or whether the position is important or not. These are important details. Maybe the position is BS and doesn’t have much authority. Maybe he’s learned the error of his ways. Without useful information this article is lame as it seems to lin…

I also don’t have a feel for what people prefer to happen?

I don't really understand people attempting to tie prosperity to morality.

Re: After DeepMind’s cofounder was placed on leave for bullying, Google promoted him

#139

Post by lowbloodsugar »

chronic2703 wrote: post #83
arkitaip wrote: post #2

> Google’s reported willingness to put up with Suleyman's behavior stands in stark contrast to its swift termination of Timnit Gebru and Margaret Mitchell, former co-leads of its AI ethics team who produced research that challenged the company’s direction on large language models. Suleyman is a sociopath who makes Google money - that's why he was promoted and rewarded for his sociopathy.

> who makes Google money I’m sure you invest your personal portfolio in companies that make less money (lower return) when higher return alternatives are available?

Yes, and for obvious reasons.

Re: After DeepMind’s cofounder was placed on leave for bullying, Google promoted him

#140

Post by Volundr »

truetraveller wrote: post #129
oytis wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a total mystery to me why do people feel the urge to defend him. I kind of understand this in the case of technically brilliant but socially awkward people, but this guy seems to have done nothing but management in his life. And if this is how he's doing management then I don't understand why he's tolerated at all.

We're defending him because the accusations against him are egregiously exaggerated, and without proof. I'm against screaming, but infrequent/involuntary screaming by a very senior exec does happen, and in my opinion, cannot be called abusive. In fact, I would be upset if I had a sheep for an exec. I want a exec who is kind, and who can lead and is firm. Not screaming, but almost there.

> I'm against screaming, but infrequent/involuntary screaming by a very senior exec is common place.

What?! I've worked with executives most of my career. Screaming was definitely not common place. I can only recall 2 examples, and neither lasted long or had any business being in a position of power. And what even is "involuntary screaming"? Has the executive just broken their leg or something? If so OK. But if they're just yelling at an employee about work, it's not "involuntary".

> cannot be called abusive.

It can. I'm calling it abusive to scream at an employee.

> In fact, I would be upset if I had a sheep for an exec. I want a exec who is kind, and who can lead and is firm. Not screaming, but almost there.

I don't want an exec whose almost screaming. I want an exec who is in control. Screaming is the antithesis of that.

Post reply on HN