Google fires another AI researcher who reportedly challenged findings • Hacker News Board

Re: Google fires another AI researcher who reportedly challenged findings

#21

Post by true_religion » Mon, May 02, 2022, 3:34 PM UTC

tedivm wrote: post #4

What really kills me is that Google claimed previous papers weren't up to their standard, but then ended up citing them in later papers that they've had press events around. It's really unfortunate that so much of our science is being done at large companies rather than universities, since the companies have a bias towards their bottom line which keeps them from publishing things that might damage that.

Can't you cite things that you disagree with? Or cite background material that you feel is subpar?

That would be the norm especially if your research paper is focused on new technology. For example you would write Herbet et co, in Journal Blah found results of X with method Y. However method Y has flaws of A, B, and C...

Even if a pervious study was utterly stupid in your opinion, if it's been widely publicized you still need to talk about it or else risk being accused of missing the basics.

Re: Google fires another AI researcher who reportedly challenged findings

#22

Post by hn_throwaway_99 » Mon, May 02, 2022, 3:34 PM UTC

Obviously don't know the full context of why Satrajit Chatterjee was fired, but I can say that I followed the Timnit Gebru story quite closely, and there was a gigantic chasm, IMO, between what actually happened (and by "what actually happened" I mean that I'm conservatively just considering Gebru's own statements and tweets) and how things were reported in the wider press.

The press will always be incentivized to report on "big bad Google" and make any termination sound like a David vs. Goliath battle. And, of course, while sometimes that narrative is true, there have been many cases where I've thought "These are some of the most toxic individuals I can imagine (again, by their own statements), and working with them sounds like a nightmare." To emphasize, I'm definitely not saying that's the case in the current example, but I am saying that nobody has enough info one way or the other unless they are more personally familiar with the details. Reactions based on what's written in the article are thus just personal Rorschach tests.

Re: Google fires another AI researcher who reportedly challenged findings

#23

Post by DashAnimal » Mon, May 02, 2022, 3:34 PM UTC

tedivm wrote: post #4

What really kills me is that Google claimed previous papers weren't up to their standard, but then ended up citing them in later papers that they've had press events around. It's really unfortunate that so much of our science is being done at large companies rather than universities, since the companies have a bias towards their bottom line which keeps them from publishing things that might damage that.

Do you have an example of Google citing a "below standard" paper? Curious to see.

Re: Google fires another AI researcher who reportedly challenged findings

#24

Post by krona » Mon, May 02, 2022, 3:35 PM UTC

oh_sigh wrote: post #11

Were they fired because they challenged the findings, or were they fired for their behavior after being told their paper wasn't up to snuff for some reason? Same thing with Timnit...was she fired(or "resignation accepted") because of a paper she was writing, or was she fired because of her behavior after being told the paper needed more review(or whatever)? I really doubt that Google is so wrapped up in the "computer…

Exactly. This story doesn't add up to me - too much of a non-sequitur to fire someone for simply pointing out an inconvenient truth.

Re: Google fires another AI researcher who reportedly challenged findings

#25

Post by skoskie » Mon, May 02, 2022, 3:36 PM UTC

pastacacioepepe wrote: post #8

tedivm wrote: post #4

What really kills me is that Google claimed previous papers weren't up to their standard, but then ended up citing them in later papers that they've had press events around. It's really unfortunate that so much of our science is being done at large companies rather than universities, since the companies have a bias towards their bottom line which keeps them from publishing things that might damage that.

But...but...there's nothing private investors and the free market can't do! Seriously, who thought that science for profit would net the best results for the collective benefit? You take science but replace truth with profit as the ultimate objective. I'm sure that's going to work well. The day we stop seeking profit in endeavors that can only be pursued properly at a complete economic loss, we're going to solve so m…

> Seriously, who thought that science for profit would net the best results for the collective benefit?

Nobody, and I don’t think “best results” or “collective benefit” were the goal when science started getting more commercialized.

The idea that good inventions would benefit all rather than patent holders must drive a true capitalist crazy.

Re: Google fires another AI researcher who reportedly challenged findings

#26

Post by azinman2 » Mon, May 02, 2022, 3:39 PM UTC

canaus wrote: post #20

skoskie wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Out of curiosity, are there any institutions that meets a “pure” research standard? NIST? Or is that standard unattainable because undue influence exists everywhere?

Influence exists everywhere because without influence the studies wouldn't exist in the first place.

And people need careers, successful publications and grants make that possible.

That isn’t to say everything is trash— lots of good stuff is still done with these requirements.

Re: Google fires another AI researcher who reportedly challenged findings

#27

Post by chasd00 » Mon, May 02, 2022, 3:41 PM UTC

The article is really light on details. Fired with cause could mean anything.

Re: Google fires another AI researcher who reportedly challenged findings

#28

Post by Barrin92 » Mon, May 02, 2022, 3:43 PM UTC

mc32 wrote: post #10

tedivm wrote: post #4

What really kills me is that Google claimed previous papers weren't up to their standard, but then ended up citing them in later papers that they've had press events around. It's really unfortunate that so much of our science is being done at large companies rather than universities, since the companies have a bias towards their bottom line which keeps them from publishing things that might damage that.

Universities have their own biases as well --whether it's to pad one's CV, the PI's CV, or whatever, but they are also not free from interference against 'pure' research. There is a lot of "garbage" research that happens at universities. Yes, we do expect quite a bit of research to be dead-ends --that's the nature of research, but there is a lot of research that is knowingly fraudulent or uses very suspect data and o…

That's in principle what academic tenure is for, it guarantees independence and research freedom. And while you may talk about how there's always this or that political topic that anyone will shy away from, at least in the hard sciences I think academic freedom is largely intact.

In a company you can always be fired and the singular goal is the bottom line. Much more so since modern companies seem to not operate with the mentality of the old corporate research labs like Bell, but keep a much tighter lid on things, always pushing for products.

Re: Google fires another AI researcher who reportedly challenged findings

#29

Post by protomyth » Mon, May 02, 2022, 3:43 PM UTC

xadhominemx wrote: post #6

mcdermott wrote: post #2

In the corporate world, just like government funded research, science is only science if it aligns with the desires of its funding source unfortunately.

I never experienced anything like this during the course of my government funded research. Nor did I hear of anyone else experiencing anything like this. Of course, your topic area has to align with government funders’ interests… but in my experience the conclusions do not.

I take it you never had a grant director run afoul of one of the consulting firms on I Street who didn't get the follow-on evaluation contract? 25 years and I'm still a bit peeved about how politics and who gets what makes government research such a pain in the butt. Every agency has its prejudices also which leads to some shenanigans.

Sorta off topic tip: if you are writing government grants and are in a position to become a reader, then do so. It gives you an idea how they thinks, tells you what words / wording will get your grant down-voted, and it gives you some good contacts. Had relatives do that, but went a different career direction.

Re: Google fires another AI researcher who reportedly challenged findings

#30

Post by ghaff » Mon, May 02, 2022, 3:43 PM UTC

oh_sigh wrote: post #11

Were they fired because they challenged the findings, or were they fired for their behavior after being told their paper wasn't up to snuff for some reason? Same thing with Timnit...was she fired(or "resignation accepted") because of a paper she was writing, or was she fired because of her behavior after being told the paper needed more review(or whatever)? I really doubt that Google is so wrapped up in the "computer…

Publicly "fired for cause" would seem like a pretty spectacular overreaction to someone having an academic disagreement with ML vs. human performance in some domain of chip design. Sufficiently spectacular that I'm essentially certain there's more to the story.

Timnit was at least in a more... fraught area.