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

OpenAI’s head of ethics leaves less than a year after joining

ft.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 504 posts

Re: OpenAI’s head of ethics leaves less than a year after joining

#151

Post by georgemcbay »

insanitybit wrote: post #102

I've never worked at a company with an "ethics" employee. It seems odd. Can someone explain what the point is? > She has held a variety of academic positions at Temple University, Princeton, and the University of Pennsylvania – where she completed her PhD in Political Science and Government. Her Dissertation was titled “Small Talk: The Socialities of Speech in Liberal Democratic Life.” This doesn't even feel relevant…

> I've never worked at a company with an "ethics" employee. It seems odd. Can someone explain what the point is?

An ethics department is like a human resources department, but for broader ethics related matters.

HR: Ostensibly exists to support the employees, but really exists to shield the company from both a PR and legal liability standpoint when the company has a rift with one or more employees.

Ethics Department: Ostensibly exists to make sure the company acts ethically, but really exists to shield the company from both a PR and legal liability standpoint when the company acts unethically.

It is a good personal signal that you have never worked for a company with an ethics department or an ethics employee. The less ethical your company the more likely it is to have an ethics department.

Re: OpenAI’s head of ethics leaves less than a year after joining

#152

Post by [deleted] »

forestrywat wrote: post #82

IME companies hire an ethics team to say they have an ethics team. The ethics team has no sway, no influence, and will never be able to move the business. They will try, and they will make reasonable recommendations, but the company will say, "that costs money..." and not take them.

[deleted]

Re: OpenAI’s head of ethics leaves less than a year after joining

#156

Post by lenerdenator »

sajithdilshan wrote: post #14
lenerdenator wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, economics in general doesn't, but yes. There isn't much ethical merit in building a wall around a city with guard towers, attack dogs, and anti-personnel mines to keep the citizens in so that they can contribute to your economic vision, for example.

You mean like in East Berlin?

Exactly East Berlin, actually.

But that's just one extreme example. States based on Marxism-Leninism and Maoism in the 20th century often required things like internal passports to travel within a republic's borders. If the state didn't want you visiting family in another part of the country, you weren't visiting family. That still applies to some extent in a few modern single-party socialist states.

My larger point is, a lack of ethics consumes most economic systems, because you can't easily gauge ethics like you can quarterly profits or the output increase brought about by the central committee's five-year plan. Humans tend toward math over empathy in such situations.

Re: OpenAI’s head of ethics leaves less than a year after joining

#157

Post by uhhhd »

Sometimes it feels like hiring ethics folks is almost all downside for companies. I genuinely don’t understand why they keep doing it.

It seems like the pattern is almost always the same: the ethics team exists quietly in the background, and the only time anyone hears about them is when they either publicly leave the company or start a campaign against it.

So what exactly is the business case? Is it actually worth maintaining an ethics function just to be able to say you have one, when the only time it becomes visible is when it goes against the company publicly? And if this outcome is so predictable, why do companies keep hiring these people in the first place?

Re: OpenAI’s head of ethics leaves less than a year after joining

#158

Post by chasd00 »

uhhhd wrote: post #157

Sometimes it feels like hiring ethics folks is almost all downside for companies. I genuinely don’t understand why they keep doing it. It seems like the pattern is almost always the same: the ethics team exists quietly in the background, and the only time anyone hears about them is when they either publicly leave the company or start a campaign against it. So what exactly is the business case? Is it actually worth ma…

there's probably a box to check on the "be attractive to investors" form and then you can also put the ethics department in HR docs as an escalation path to make emo employees feel better. I bet the ethics people get told how important they are when hired and the team is stood up but then get upset when they're continually bypassed and quit. I bet the bait/switch hurts a lot.

Re: OpenAI’s head of ethics leaves less than a year after joining

#159

Post by esseph »

nixon_why69 wrote: post #56
ltbarcly3 wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I literally said that.

You said "there are homeless people everywhere", which is technically true but omits quantity, and especially quantity compared to wealth. I'm not as positive as you are about what makes California (and Seattle) create/attract so many, but it's definitely an outlier compared to "everywhere".

I'm not as positive as you are about what makes California (and Seattle) create/attract

The weather is pretty nice, much more stable than in the east coast.

Re: OpenAI’s head of ethics leaves less than a year after joining

#160

Post by [deleted] »

YackerLose wrote: post #46
ltbarcly3 wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's everywhere, there are homeless people everywhere. The difference is Silicon Valley feels so guilty about it's wealth it refuses to do the normal things that societies do to prevent people from living like animals because 'rights' or something, so they let drug addicts live in their common spaces without treatment. This normally isn't tolerated in a functioning society where people are pressured into behaviors…

Homeless people are a better way to keep cowardly minions (I mean, valuable employees) in line than cops. The homeless are an important part of capitalist power structures. They are a visible reminder of the consequences for not meeting quarterly goals.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN