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

More than 1,200 Google workers condemn firing of AI scientist Timnit Gebru

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 266 posts

Re: More than 1,200 Google workers condemn firing of AI scientist Timnit Gebru

#231

Post by that_guy_iain »

rafiki6 wrote: post #128
telltruth wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Initially I took Google's side given Gebru has history of bullying so aggressively and has no qualms to play race/gender cards at every opportunity she gets. But now that more details (including the paper in question) has been revealed, it's hard to stay on Google's side. It is clear that the peer review process that Jeff Dean had described has been optional for all intent and purpose. It says along similar lines tha…

I think that's a balanced view. The fact is, Google might have constructively dismissed her because of her history and attitude and they knew if they outright fired her, it would be a PR nightmare. Letting her resign like this makes it much more complex and doesn't open them up to any serious threat of litigation. She can try to sue them, but now that she made it public it's quite unlikely any court would look at it.…

> All in all, it's obvious Google didn't follow their own supposed research protocols, but this whole thing is much more complex and I think it has very little to do with her paper.

She still had a job after she published the paper, she still had a job after she told people to stop working, she stopped having a job after she demanded confidental HR records of people who feared giving her rather simple feedback.

Re: More than 1,200 Google workers condemn firing of AI scientist Timnit Gebru

#232

Post by mpweiher »

claudeganon wrote: post #66
rfrey wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Without commenting on the politics of this particular case, I think what you describe is built into the definition of "boss".

Not universally though. In countries with stronger labor protections and unions, you can’t just fire people for philosophical disagreements (not without those disputes being mediated anyway). I don’t understand how we arrived at some conception of workplaces as little dictatorships, where bosses can treat people however they want and that’s somehow good or legitimate.

Citizen of country with some of the strongest worker protections here: not over philosophical differences.

Very much so for refusing to do work assigned to you.

And it doesn't mean "bosses can treat people however they want". It means "you are employed to do a job, if you refuse to do that job, you are no longer employed"

Re: More than 1,200 Google workers condemn firing of AI scientist Timnit Gebru

#233

Post by sam0x17 »

kop316 wrote: post #161
sam0x17 wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem with this view, though, is imagine if you're in that situation, and you leave, only to be replaced with someone with more amoral views. It's the opposite of a solution imo.

At the risk of invoking Godwin's law....this is exactly Rodolf Hoss' defense at the Nuremberg trails: "Don’t you see, we SS men were not supposed to think about these things; ... somebody else would have done just as well if I hadn’t" https://www.facinghistory.org/holocaust-and-human-behavior/c... I would be extremely cauticous about using the argument of "well If I don't do it, someone else will".

But notice there is a difference between following orders and staying in a role but using what power you have to enact change. There is a third route.

Re: More than 1,200 Google workers condemn firing of AI scientist Timnit Gebru

#234

Post by tertius »

claudeganon wrote: post #219
tertius wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, this is not uniquely American. Which country are you from that doesn't require employees to act in a way as directed by the company that employs them?

Literally any country with strong laws protecting strikes and work stoppages? In many parts of Europe, I can convince my coworkers that our bosses are treating us unfairly, unsafely, etc, we can walk off the job and not get fired. I doubt any employer would want us to do that, so it would be entirely against their “direction.”

"Do my bidding" is different from "do my bidding being paid way below market rate" or "do my bidding and I don't care if that involves a high likelihood of losing a limb".

Also, "do my bidding" should be written as "do your job."

I'm from a country with strong labor protections (striking, 3 strike dismissal etc.), and you're moving the goalposts.

Re: More than 1,200 Google workers condemn firing of AI scientist Timnit Gebru

#236

Post by xiphias2 »

true_religion wrote: post #200
xiphias2 wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It may work with physical work, but at FANG companies software engineers will just make up for it on the weekends at nights. Stack ranking works wonderfully at making engineers to compete in working as much as they can (which is not a bad thing, just how the system works).

All that stuff sounds like systematic abuses that a union would reduce. The problem of the effectiveness of Facebook employee walkouts stems from the fact that they aren’t a real union, so the employer can just force them to make it up without providing for any additional compensation. Any protest is a null option until the whole thing catalyzes and they form a union to address the repeated disregard the company show…

,,All that stuff sounds like systematic abuses that a union would reduce.''

It doesn't always feel like it when you get an above average salary. Also it really depends on the team, how much the tech lead and the manager can push back to external requests...I don't see how adding even more politics can solve political issues. The fact that it's super easy to move between teams is much more important than anything the union could achieve.

Re: More than 1,200 Google workers condemn firing of AI scientist Timnit Gebru

#237

Post by confidantlake »

telltruth wrote: post #103
miked85 wrote: post #13

She gave her employer an ultimatum, threatening to quit if she didn't get her way. They called her bluff. I don't see how that is the same as being fired. At that point she was on her way out, one way or another; most employers would rather not work with people like this.

Initially I took Google's side given Gebru has history of bullying so aggressively and has no qualms to play race/gender cards at every opportunity she gets. But now that more details (including the paper in question) has been revealed, it's hard to stay on Google's side. It is clear that the peer review process that Jeff Dean had described has been optional for all intent and purpose. It says along similar lines tha…

I didn't even know that she had a history of bullying before I concluded she was in the wrong. My incomplete understanding is she submitted a paper, google said it was not submitted in time and they made her retract it, and in response she demanded the names of those who reviewed the paper or else she would resign. That is completely unacceptable behavior and they were right to accept her resignation. The fact that she has a history of bullying makes it even worse for her. Of course they aren't going to give her the names of those people so she can bully them too.

Re: More than 1,200 Google workers condemn firing of AI scientist Timnit Gebru

#238

Post by confidantlake »

thu2111 wrote: post #230
telltruth wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Initially I took Google's side given Gebru has history of bullying so aggressively and has no qualms to play race/gender cards at every opportunity she gets. But now that more details (including the paper in question) has been revealed, it's hard to stay on Google's side. It is clear that the peer review process that Jeff Dean had described has been optional for all intent and purpose. It says along similar lines tha…

It's really sad watching people bend over backwards trying to give this person a break. You admit she's a bully, super aggressive, constantly makes spurious accusations of racism, attempts to destroy her enemies totally and is in general a nightmare employee in every way. Then you say you take her side because Dean could have given her "transparency"? Are you aware she was demanding the identities of people who had c…

Agree 100%. We should not be protecting bullies regardless of race, gender, position in the company whatever. If you don't treat people well you are out.

Re: More than 1,200 Google workers condemn firing of AI scientist Timnit Gebru

#239

Post by bisectable »

SpicyLemonZest wrote: post #65
zartar wrote: post #26

I find the semi-regular condemnations from employees of big tech companies hollow. If you work for one of these companies and find their behavior unsavory, go work somewhere else - this is actually what might cause executives at these companies to reflect on how they might change course. The fact that most of these employees could easily get well paying (just not as _ridiculously well paying_) jobs elsewhere to me fe…

They're often meant to be somewhat hollow. The referenced letter ( https://googlewalkout.medium.com/standing-with-dr-timnit-geb... ) uses dramatic language to issue pretty anodyne demands: Brain leadership should meet with her former team and explain what went wrong, Google should publicly explain what it was they found objectionable in her paper, and Google Research should confirm they're committed to research integ…

The public sphere is very heavily slanted. Few people dare come out under their own name and condemn the bullying behavior of Timnit, for fear of being subjected to that very bullying, which has drastic real life consequences. The letter demands to push the conversation into the public sphere, where one sided Twitter and media pressure can be fully applied. One has to be very naive and sheltered to sign such a letter.

Re: More than 1,200 Google workers condemn firing of AI scientist Timnit Gebru

#240

Post by InTheArena »

pmoriarty wrote: post #185
metabagel wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I thought those are also job performance considerations?

If they are job performance considerations, then what is the person I replied to talking about?

Ideological conformance. Google has a particular world view that insists that privacy is not a human right, that certain political positions are verboten and unions are bad.
Post reply on HN