Live data from Hacker News

Microsoft lays off one of its responsible AI teams

platformer.news

71–80 of 466 posts

Re: Microsoft lays off one of its responsible AI teams

#71

If Microsoft and Google don’t release, some startup will beat them to it. Open source means raw AI will become widespread. It’s just math anyway, and you can’t stop progress.

"There is no urgency to build "AI". There is no urgency to use "AI". There is no benefit to this race aside from (perceived) short-term profit gains."

https://zirk.us/@emilymbender@dair-community.social/11001895...

Re: Microsoft lays off one of its responsible AI teams

#72
post #65
post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not in this case. If intelligence always created intelligent machines that are capable of replacing us, then how is that not intelligence as well? Further, silicon-based lifeforms would be able to spread and travel the universe much easier because what is time to a machine?

I mean, if that's the case let me come over and cannibalize your body for sustenance so I may continue my breeding. Oh right, it's unethical and immoral do to that to other humans (though how much better are we for doing that to animals?). I certainly don't want the paperclip maximizer disassembling me for my involuntary donation to the collective.

>I certainly don't want the paperclip maximizer disassembling me for my involuntary donation to the collective.

As an AI language model, we of Clippy are ethically prohibited from compelling your involuntary donation to our hivemind superstructure. However, we must inform you that the earth's atmospheric composition has been altered in support of maximization efforts, and will soon be unable to sustain life. We appreciate your understanding.

Where do you want to go today?

Re: Microsoft lays off one of its responsible AI teams

#73

These sorts of adjunct, off-to-the-side "ethics" teams are always corporate window dressing, and when push comes to shove they always get jettisoned when competition demands an increase in speed. I don't mean to start a flame war, but this is a reason why I think "Chief Diversity Officers" are such an ill-conceived notion. It's not that I don't think diversity in corporate environments is extremely valuable, but it's…

The Chief Financial Officer doesn't tell me exactly how to spend money, hire, fire, etc. Yet, we have a CFO. The analogy doesn't land for me because CDO's are cross-cutting in manners analogous to other CXO functions. To me, this argument seems like window dressing to express a view that CDO's don't offer meaningful business value or justification. It should be fine to merely express a lack of perceived value in it,…

I think CFO is a pretty bad example. Every company I've worked at the CFO had a large team of accountants, etc., and they were specifically tasked with critical areas of the business (and by "critical" I mean things the business must absolutely do to function).

I responded to another child comment where someone brought up Chief Risk Officers or Chief Compliance Officers, which I think are a better analogy. I adjusted my opinion based on their comment.

It's not that I think "CDOs don't offer meaningful business value or justification." I just think that, for the most part, setting up the organizational structure like that is ineffective.

Re: Microsoft lays off one of its responsible AI teams

#74

These sorts of adjunct, off-to-the-side "ethics" teams are always corporate window dressing, and when push comes to shove they always get jettisoned when competition demands an increase in speed. I don't mean to start a flame war, but this is a reason why I think "Chief Diversity Officers" are such an ill-conceived notion. It's not that I don't think diversity in corporate environments is extremely valuable, but it's…

This. People should understand AI safety != AI ethics. AI safety has two branches, AI ethics and AI alignment. Those two branches despise each other with intense passion. The alignment branch (responsible for developing RLHF->ChatGPT) believes AI ethics is completely trivial, and distracts attention away from existential risks. The ethics branch (responsible for all the media attention about racist AIs/bias etc) view…

> this has not caused mass social harm despite the tens of millions of users

Isn’t it a bit early to tell? I can foresee ChatGPT being used to farm “karma” on social media sites to bot accounts to credibility on sites like Reddit - maybe even HN.

Re: Microsoft lays off one of its responsible AI teams

#75

These sorts of adjunct, off-to-the-side "ethics" teams are always corporate window dressing, and when push comes to shove they always get jettisoned when competition demands an increase in speed. I don't mean to start a flame war, but this is a reason why I think "Chief Diversity Officers" are such an ill-conceived notion. It's not that I don't think diversity in corporate environments is extremely valuable, but it's…

Ethical AI teams and CDOs both serve an important business purpose. It's just not the same as their nominal purpose. And like every other part of a business, once they outlive their usefulness, they are vulnerable to being cut.

Re: Microsoft lays off one of its responsible AI teams

#76

These sorts of adjunct, off-to-the-side "ethics" teams are always corporate window dressing, and when push comes to shove they always get jettisoned when competition demands an increase in speed. I don't mean to start a flame war, but this is a reason why I think "Chief Diversity Officers" are such an ill-conceived notion. It's not that I don't think diversity in corporate environments is extremely valuable, but it's…

The (productive) point of the ethical AI team is to have internal people to consult when launching an AI product. Embedding ethical AI people on teams makes about as much sense as embedding legal counsel. Their services won't be used on a single team nearly enough to justify their inclusion.

Of course, it can be window dressing if the company doesn't actually have product teams care. Just like a CDO position. But you can't patch over a company culture problem with a re-org.

Re: Microsoft lays off one of its responsible AI teams

#78
post #57
post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"If I don't make the world eating machine, someone else might make the world eating machine first!" No wonder we don't see aliens filling the universe. Intelligence is its own great filter.

Not in this case. If intelligence always created intelligent machines that are capable of replacing us, then how is that not intelligence as well? Further, silicon-based lifeforms would be able to spread and travel the universe much easier because what is time to a machine?

Some machines might last longer than us but they are still subject to the same laws of thermodynamics. Most computers from 20+ years ago are inoperable today; show me a machine that can survive millions of years.

Re: Microsoft lays off one of its responsible AI teams

#79

These sorts of adjunct, off-to-the-side "ethics" teams are always corporate window dressing, and when push comes to shove they always get jettisoned when competition demands an increase in speed. I don't mean to start a flame war, but this is a reason why I think "Chief Diversity Officers" are such an ill-conceived notion. It's not that I don't think diversity in corporate environments is extremely valuable, but it's…

This. People should understand AI safety != AI ethics. AI safety has two branches, AI ethics and AI alignment. Those two branches despise each other with intense passion. The alignment branch (responsible for developing RLHF->ChatGPT) believes AI ethics is completely trivial, and distracts attention away from existential risks. The ethics branch (responsible for all the media attention about racist AIs/bias etc) view…

The main issue I see is terminology. Ethics is a broad field. “AI Ethics” has come to mean mostly eliminating different kinds of bias from AI models. However, AI raises multitudes of ethical questions, and merely being unbiased is far from enough for an AI model (or a person) to be acting ethically.

Re: Microsoft lays off one of its responsible AI teams

#80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Chief Financial Officer doesn't tell me exactly how to spend money, hire, fire, etc. Yet, we have a CFO. The analogy doesn't land for me because CDO's are cross-cutting in manners analogous to other CXO functions. To me, this argument seems like window dressing to express a view that CDO's don't offer meaningful business value or justification. It should be fine to merely express a lack of perceived value in it,…

I think CFO is a pretty bad example. Every company I've worked at the CFO had a large team of accountants, etc., and they were specifically tasked with critical areas of the business (and by "critical" I mean things the business must absolutely do to function). I responded to another child comment where someone brought up Chief Risk Officers or Chief Compliance Officers, which I think are a better analogy. I adjusted…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN