How Google’s AI ethics meltdown could shape policy • Hacker News Board

Re: How Google’s AI ethics meltdown could shape policy

#11

Post by fruffy » Thu, Dec 17, 2020, 1:15 PM UTC

oli5679 wrote: post #10

Hnrobert42 wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All the details were hashed out in posts here a few weeks ago. I won’t summarize because one side or the other will downvote me, but you can search HN.

Can you link?

This is the most comprehensive discussion on this topic, which also deals with the fallout on Twitter. Includes (anonymous) comments by Google employees:

https://old.reddit.com/r/MachineLearning/comments/k77sxz/d_t...

Otherwise this search will cover most of the HN debate: https://hn.algolia.com/?q=gebru

Re: How Google’s AI ethics meltdown could shape policy

#12

Post by mlthoughts2018 » Thu, Dec 17, 2020, 1:40 PM UTC

mfDjB wrote: post #9

I find the term "ethics" has had its meaning warped lately, ironically for the purposes of "ethics-washing" which is what this article is claiming is happening when big corporations engage in AI ethics. When I worked at a FAANG company in the machine learning field, there was a group of people interested in ethics, but they never seemed to discuss different views on ethics. They often seemed to use the word as a tool…

It reminds me a lot of Robin Hanson’s post “Inequality talk is about grabbing.”

https://www.overcomingbias.com/2013/08/inequality-is-about-g...

Re: How Google’s AI ethics meltdown could shape policy

#13

Post by mam2 » Thu, Dec 17, 2020, 1:40 PM UTC

There's no meltdown, everyone will have forgotten the story in 2021

Re: How Google’s AI ethics meltdown could shape policy

#14

Post by chokeartist » Thu, Dec 17, 2020, 1:40 PM UTC

mfDjB wrote: post #9

I find the term "ethics" has had its meaning warped lately, ironically for the purposes of "ethics-washing" which is what this article is claiming is happening when big corporations engage in AI ethics. When I worked at a FAANG company in the machine learning field, there was a group of people interested in ethics, but they never seemed to discuss different views on ethics. They often seemed to use the word as a tool…

30 years ago, "ethics" generally translated to don't be a dick and treat people how you would want to be treated.

Compared to now, "ethics" is essentially a super-big tent of virtue signaling.

Re: How Google’s AI ethics meltdown could shape policy

#15

Post by prepend » Thu, Dec 17, 2020, 1:42 PM UTC

Hnrobert42 wrote: post #8

prepend wrote: post #6

This topic is interesting to me but it’s so hard to learn about. The reporting seems to have so much lack of detail it’s weird. It’s all summaries of statements without sources. I understand that Gebru may feel dehumanized but without seeing the email that she references, it’s hard for me to understand her statement. If the CEO of Google painted her as “an angry black woman” then that’s a really big deal. If she feel…

All the details were hashed out in posts here a few weeks ago. I won’t summarize because one side or the other will downvote me, but you can search HN.

I read all of those and never got the details. I could never find the actual email she sent. Just the email she sent to the listserv.

I did end up finding Pichai’s email and while it was bland corporate speak, I don’t understand how it was particularly damning. I’m not sure how anyone could expect Google to apologize when they don’t think they are wrong, or especially through a company wide email. If anything it’s a positive that the CEO is taking such interest and spending such energy on this.

Re: How Google’s AI ethics meltdown could shape policy

#16

Post by mark_l_watson » Thu, Dec 17, 2020, 1:48 PM UTC

That is one of the better articles I have read on Google’s ethical missteps (that are probably correct from hard-nosed business optimization).

We need government action to apply reasonable guardrails on the actions of the largest tech companies, a clear legal structure that puts society first and still allows growth and profits. I am a member of the Libertarian Party (recent, basically my disgust with the DNC and RNC), and I feel a bit like a hypocrite for taking a non-Libertarian view of the current situation with Google and Facebook.

Re: How Google’s AI ethics meltdown could shape policy

#17

Post by esja » Thu, Dec 17, 2020, 2:40 PM UTC

mfDjB wrote: post #9

I find the term "ethics" has had its meaning warped lately, ironically for the purposes of "ethics-washing" which is what this article is claiming is happening when big corporations engage in AI ethics. When I worked at a FAANG company in the machine learning field, there was a group of people interested in ethics, but they never seemed to discuss different views on ethics. They often seemed to use the word as a tool…

In my experience, a surprising proportion of people who get involved in these "ethics" initiatives are mostly there to force their own personal ethics onto the machine, even if it means training the machine to ignore reality and skew it in some direction.

These people are not interested in meta-ethics or any critical examination of their own chosen beliefs. They just want things to be the way they want them to be, and manipulating the AI is a means to that end.

I have no view on whether that is happening at Google. Just a general observation.

Re: How Google’s AI ethics meltdown could shape policy

#18

Post by glenneroo » Thu, Dec 17, 2020, 2:44 PM UTC

mfDjB wrote: post #9

I find the term "ethics" has had its meaning warped lately, ironically for the purposes of "ethics-washing" which is what this article is claiming is happening when big corporations engage in AI ethics. When I worked at a FAANG company in the machine learning field, there was a group of people interested in ethics, but they never seemed to discuss different views on ethics. They often seemed to use the word as a tool…

> The question as to whether these demands are ethical is not clear at all to me.

You left out some vital pieces of context from the same article[0]:

> The note centers on the departure of Google AI ethics researcher Timnit Gebru, which set off protests inside the company. Citing that situation, the employees called for a company vice president, Megan Kacholia, to no longer be part of their reporting chain. “We have lost trust in her as a leader,” the researchers wrote, according to a copy of the later obtained by Bloomberg.

> “Google’s short-sighted decision to fire and retaliate against a core member of the Ethical AI team makes it clear that we need swift and structural changes if this work is to continue, and if the legitimacy of the field as a whole is to persevere,” the letter reads.

> “This research must be able to contest the company’s short-term interests and immediate revenue agendas, as well as to investigate AI that is deployed by Google’s competitors with similar ethical motives,” the researchers added.

As I understand it, the demands themselves are not directly ethical, but in order to do their job (dealing with ethics), they need the VP to stop blocking them in order to make money. As for Gebru receiving a higher position, my take is that, as is with most companies, being a higher-level in the hierarchy allows one to affect more change within the company (or, perhaps in this case, even just to get the job done?).

[0]: https://www.bloomberg.com/amp/news/articles/2020-12-16/googl...

Re: How Google’s AI ethics meltdown could shape policy

#19

Post by listless » Thu, Dec 17, 2020, 3:37 PM UTC

The level of misinformation here is astonishing. Blocked and Reported did a deep dive on this recently with Ars Technica co-founder. https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/blocked-and-reported/i...

And by “misinformation” I mean it’s either in the podcast or in this article. You be the judge.

Re: How Google’s AI ethics meltdown could shape policy

#20

Post by innagadadavida » Thu, Dec 17, 2020, 5:15 PM UTC

esja wrote: post #17

mfDjB wrote: post #9

I find the term "ethics" has had its meaning warped lately, ironically for the purposes of "ethics-washing" which is what this article is claiming is happening when big corporations engage in AI ethics. When I worked at a FAANG company in the machine learning field, there was a group of people interested in ethics, but they never seemed to discuss different views on ethics. They often seemed to use the word as a tool…

In my experience, a surprising proportion of people who get involved in these "ethics" initiatives are mostly there to force their own personal ethics onto the machine, even if it means training the machine to ignore reality and skew it in some direction. These people are not interested in meta-ethics or any critical examination of their own chosen beliefs. They just want things to be the way they want them to be, an…

Just look at how well it has worked out for the researcher. People who are willing to make a scene and get a lot of attention will win and benefit a lot. If anyone still thinks this is about AI ethics or any other ethics, it definitely is not. This is just getting ahead in a hyper competitive world. Sometimes using questionable means.