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

221–230 of 349 posts

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

#221

Post by Talanes »

digislave wrote: post #202
edgyquant wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did you just compare asking if something looks good to having them write up an assessment of Russian political history? Yeah I’ll go ahead and ask my dog walker to write me an analysis of the potential outcomes if Britain had joined against the US during the Trent affair. If they refuse I’ll fire them and write horrible reviews about them because obviously they don’t take their job seriously /s You’ve got to be kiddi…

You are totally in your rights to fire your dog walker if they refuse to write you an essay about Russian political history.

You're also totally in your rights to ask your bank teller to write you an essay about Russian political history and switch banks if they refuse. Being within your rights doesn't mean you're not acting totally insane.

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

#222

Post by vitus »

HWR_14 wrote: post #65
pyuser583 wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Only 1.3 percent of students drop out of Oxford, versus 7.4 percent for the UK. https://www.ox.ac.uk/about/facts-and-figures/full-version-fa... Not at all like America where only 1/3 graduate.

In elite schools [edit: that are as elite as] Oxford, the drop out rate would be close to Oxford's. The US numbers are pretty skewed by the massive drop out rate in 2-year community colleges, which both admit huge numbers of people and have very high dropout rates. Also, a huge percentage of dropouts are in the first year, when people are deciding that college may not work for them or be the right fit.

Actually, the US numbers are already filtered to 4-year institutions.

"The overall 6-year graduation rate for first-time, full-time undergraduate students who began seeking a bachelor’s degree at 4-year degree-granting institutions in fall 2012 was 62 percent. That is, by 2018 some 62 percent of students had completed a bachelor’s degree at the same institution where they started in 2012."

https://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=40

(There is some amount of skew based on this definition for students who transferred to a different institution and then completed on time, but it's hard to find numbers on students who transferred from one four-year institution to another, as opposed to all transfers who predominantly come from 2-year community colleges.)

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

#223

Post by qeternity »

password321 wrote: post #215
qeternity wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He was a childhood friend of Demis. The cofounder title seems to be less profound here.

Ok so the new theory is that there is nepotism present at DeepMind thanks to Demis Hassabis.

That’s not at all what I suggested. It seems like you just want an argument.

Let me explain again slower: you implied that him being cofounder conferred some level of competence to him. I’m saying that he’s not really a cofounder in the traditional sense of the word, and so maybe that title doesn’t carry as much weight here.

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

#224

Post by whalesalad »

gundmc wrote: post #8

I feel like this story is overblown. He was clearly a bad manager. From what I can gather, he was placed on leave after an investigation and then moved to a policy position where he does not manage anyone. Calling it a promotion is pure spin.

Did you miss the whole “I crush people” sociopath situation?

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

#225

Post by torstenvl »

neolog wrote: post #32
torstenvl wrote: post #12

"Misconduct" of "bullying"? With no further details or facts? Unless he was actually committing a crime and Google somehow shielded him from criminal responsibility, this is a nothingburger. When you are responsible for a significant step in AI progress you get promoted. I swear to God, the SV woker-than-thou crowd will be trying to cancel Babbage for "sexual harassment" of Ada Lovelace soon.

There are lots of practices that aren't crimes but which should nevertheless be discouraged within organizations.

I don't agree in this context. The terms "misconduct" and "bullying" are far too close to allegations of crimes. Our society is trending toward disregard of the presumption of innocence, and that is far more of a societal problem than having an aggressive and ambitious team leader who cares more about results than coddling.

If he committed a crime, the evidence should be presented. If he did not, then tarring him with terms like "misconduct" and suggesting that Google should take retributive action against him are anathema to a fair society.

For those who disagree, let me pose a question: what, exactly, does bullying constitute if it doesn't also constitute an assault or criminal harassment? and with regard to whatever residual scope of the term remains, why does that justify denying a promotion to someone behind a project as ambitious and successful as DeepMind?

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

#226

Post by machinelearning »

Have to say the obvious thing: Shit like this is unacceptable.

Maybe the article is a hit piece with questionable factual credibility. So this isn’t a statement about the person itself but the behavior described by the article.

People in this thread seem to be confusing disagreeability and a relentless focus on achieving a goal vs being drunk with power.

Both of these things may manifest a similar kind of harshness but they are very different. The kind of behavior described in this article is of someone who uses their (probably undeserved) power to protect their own position. These kinds of people should be removed from an organization as they without exception harm the organization more than they contribute to it.

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

#227

Post by etothepii »

jspash wrote: post #145
truetraveller wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Is this a common thing outside Silicon Valley? The US? Having worked almost ny entire professional life outside of the States I have never, not once, heard of this happening. And it would absolutely not be tolerated in any professional organisation that I’ve been part of. Or have I just been lucky not to have come across this type of behaviour?

You have just been lucky, back office technology when I used to work for a large bank in the UK there was a manager who would routinely shout at everyone. He was repeatedly promoted and seen as a person who "got things done."

I really pitied the juniors who learned to model this as what "good" looked like, I suspect it has genuinely harmed their long term life prospects.

In response to complaints it was always, "he's a Southern European, they're passionate," that came as the response.

So not unusual at all.

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

#228

Post by mhh__ »

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.

Working with quite a few contrarians, I have noticed a tendency to be so done-with-it and disapproving of conventional wisdom that one can end up subtly approving really immoral things on the basis that you can kind of do anything - proportionality be damned - as long as you are right (for some value of correct)

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

#229

Post by zz865 »

omarhaneef wrote: post #106

Here is an observation, make of it what you will: These are the environments I’ve been in where it has been very common for people to scream at each other, both loudly and often: - banking - venture - consulting These are the environments where I have not seen this behavior: - academia - tech - an operating company I’ll tell you what makes it tolerable and normal versus abusive: if a subordinate is “allowed” to yell…

Honestly I wish there was more screaming and yelling. I'm tired of fake smiles and passive aggressive behavior. If you dont like what I'm doing please tell me. I'm up for a proper debate.

One of the best places I worked at occasionally one guy would completely throw a tantrum - but then at the end of the day would have a few beers with the guy he was arguing with and make up. People just learned how he was. Ideally tantrums aren't the best way to do it, but some proper communication would be good.

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

#230

Post by TheSpiceIsLife »

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 the difference is a good manager will be good at difficult one on one meetings with subordinates as part of their job on a regular basis. They’re good at the hard bits of soft squishy things with complex needs.

An architect may have the occasional difficult meeting with other stakeholders from time to time, but their regular role is not managing people.

Post reply on HN