AI at Google: our principles • Hacker News Board

Re: AI at Google: our principles

#271

Post by thisrod » Fri, Jun 08, 2018, 12:46 AM UTC

EpicEng wrote: post #55

So, I'm all for giving someone the benefit of the doubt if they have a change of heart upon reconsidering an issue, but this coming after the fact rings a bit hollow to me. I think the only principle at play here is that it became a PR issue. That's fine, but let's be honest about it. Early emails between Google execs framed this project only in terms of revenue and potential PR backlash. As far as we're aware, there…

I'd put this another way. Here is the CEO of Google laying down the law. And the first question to ask, before you bother reading or discussing any law, is what redress you have when someone breaks it.

If Google does start building weapons, you can always turn up with a sledgehammer. How do these principles reduce the need for you to do that?

Re: AI at Google: our principles

#272

Post by rmk » Fri, Jun 08, 2018, 12:58 AM UTC

Daishiman wrote: post #266

rmk wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am aware of America's many follies and villainous acts in support of misguided notions. It's regrettable, but Americans as a group have strived to rectify wrongs and steer our country in the right direction. I deeply cherish our American values and think they're what set us apart from the rest of the world. I can't for the life of me see why Sundar Pichai should be beholden to his (significantly foreign) employees…

> . It's regrettable, but Americans as a group have strived to rectify wrongs and steer our country in the right direction. I deeply cherish our American values and think they're what set us apart from the rest of the world. Ha. Ha ha. Hahahah. Please, keep drinking that Kool-Aid of American exceptionalism. Apart from the British, which other country has contributed to more invasions in foreign countries for the sake…

> Please, keep drinking that Kool-Aid of American exceptionalism. Apart from the British, which other country has contributed to more invasions in foreign countries for the sake of purely economic interests?

I will!

Which country came to the aid of Britain, and all those Western European nations when they were faced with the existential threat of Nazism? Which country has provided refuge and solace to more oppressed and exiled peoples in the world than the US? Which country fought a violent war to rid itself of slavery? Surely not the Western European nations you speak of.

America has done a lot of damage in this world, but I can't think of any other nation that has done so much good either.

Re: AI at Google: our principles

#273

Post by outworlder » Fri, Jun 08, 2018, 1:05 AM UTC

EpicEng wrote: post #55

So, I'm all for giving someone the benefit of the doubt if they have a change of heart upon reconsidering an issue, but this coming after the fact rings a bit hollow to me. I think the only principle at play here is that it became a PR issue. That's fine, but let's be honest about it. Early emails between Google execs framed this project only in terms of revenue and potential PR backlash. As far as we're aware, there…

Is that all? 250M/year is still peanuts for a company like Google.

Re: AI at Google: our principles

#274

Post by ISL » Fri, Jun 08, 2018, 1:08 AM UTC

giobox wrote: post #197

ISL wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Japanese were hardly already defeated. Had the bombs not been dropped, the United States would have invaded Japan directly, island by island, until the country surrendered. The loss of life on both sides would have been tremendous. Source: My grandfather had orders to go and do exactly that when the dropping of the bombs ended the war.

This is of course one of the justifications American leaders used, and as always the victor gets to set the perceived historical narrative. Politically it was extremely important for the US to believe the bomb materially shortened the war given the huge amount of resources the Manhattan Project had consumed that otherwise could have been invested elsewhere in the war effort, especially when the military had to justif…

I believe that much of the world is completely unaware of the devastation wrought by the firebombing campaigns.

To quote Wikipedia: "On the night of 9–10 March 1945, Operation Meetinghouse was conducted and is regarded as the single most destructive bombing raid in human history. 16 square miles (41 km2) of central Tokyo were annihilated, over 1 million were made homeless with an estimated 100,000 civilian deaths."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombing_of_Tokyo

Re: AI at Google: our principles

#275

Post by ljw1001 » Fri, Jun 08, 2018, 1:09 AM UTC

themacguffinman wrote: post #173

mtgx wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's a public standard that they're setting for themselves. They already had a public standard that people actually believed in for a good many years: *Don't be evil." They've been palpably moving away from that each year, and it's been obvious in their statements, documents, as well as actions.

"Don't be evil" is incredibly vague and practically meaningless. What the hell is evil, and since when did everyone agree on what evil means? It's obvious to you that they're getting "evil", it certainly isn't obvious to me.

collusion to keep salaries down may not be evil in the super-villain sense, but it's hard to see as ethical.

Not being evil has always been a side-show to the main event: the enormous wealth-generation that paid for all the good stuff. It's still the wealth-generation in the drivers seat.

Re: AI at Google: our principles

#276

Post by joshuamorton » Fri, Jun 08, 2018, 1:10 AM UTC

rmk wrote: post #260

joshuamorton wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Hardly confusing. Except that much of what you're saying implies that you do think these companies should be regulated in a way that forces them to do this. Or at least, if that's not what you're saying, then you seem to be insinuating a whole lot for no apparent purpose. This is why I'm confused. Your stated words and actions (ie the rest of your words) don't appear to match up. >Google doesn't just use this techno…

Here we have a difference of opinion. I strongly believe corporations are less accountable to the general public than individuals or (democratic) Government, including the Military. I simply do not believe in corporate personhood. I do think there is a large distinction between individuals and corporations, and corporations, on the whole behave much more unethically and can wreak much more havoc than individuals. The…

>I simply do not believe in corporate personhood.

I don't think what I'm saying depends on corporate personhood. My point is, if you claim that corporations have a responsibility to contribute back to the military, you are claiming that someone at the company should do that.

Further, in your post that started this subthread, you stated

>It's high time these companies are regulated and their malfeasance reined in by the United States.

That, at least to me, reads as though you think that the US should regulate these companies in ways that require them to give back to the military. Which again, which employees should do that? How can you compel a company without, at some level, compelling the individuals within the company? Which you've at least claimed you don't want to do?

Re: AI at Google: our principles

#277

Post by thrusong » Fri, Jun 08, 2018, 1:12 AM UTC

Didn't Google have a motto of "Don't be evil," and then new management retired the saying? What's stopping that from happening again in this case?

Re: AI at Google: our principles

#278

Post by AtomicOrbital » Fri, Jun 08, 2018, 1:24 AM UTC

Humanity is racing ever faster to craft its own replacement as a species and we need to acknowledge this as our finest gift imaginable ... the cat is out of the bag on AI and no amount of corporate double speak can shed responsibility for any organization who employs armies who then freely spread these skills ... passing the torch to that which runs at light speed and is free of the limits of time which self evolves its own hardware and software can only be something we collectively should be proud of not afraid of ... rejoice as we molt and fly into the infinite now

Re: AI at Google: our principles

#279

Post by wu-ikkyu » Fri, Jun 08, 2018, 1:29 AM UTC

AtomicOrbital wrote: post #278

Humanity is racing ever faster to craft its own replacement as a species and we need to acknowledge this as our finest gift imaginable ... the cat is out of the bag on AI and no amount of corporate double speak can shed responsibility for any organization who employs armies who then freely spread these skills ... passing the torch to that which runs at light speed and is free of the limits of time which self evolves…

>can only be something we collectively should be proud of not afraid of

If AI is used for mass murder of the human species, should we be proud? Humility, rather than hubris, is existentially important when it comes to wielding the most extreme power humanity has ever known

Re: AI at Google: our principles

#280

Post by mrep » Fri, Jun 08, 2018, 1:38 AM UTC

rmk wrote: post #166

TaylorAlexander wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The whole idea of “protecting the national insterests” of the US creeps me out, as that to me usually means oppressing others, interfering with democracy in foreign countries, and generally sacrificing people outside the US to maintain the global hegemony we promote. I can tell you see it differently, but I hope you see that not all people see promoting “US government interests” as an automatically good thing, given…

I am aware of America's many follies and villainous acts in support of misguided notions. It's regrettable, but Americans as a group have strived to rectify wrongs and steer our country in the right direction. I deeply cherish our American values and think they're what set us apart from the rest of the world. I can't for the life of me see why Sundar Pichai should be beholden to his (significantly foreign) employees…

> I can't for the life of me see why Sundar Pichai should be beholden to his (significantly foreign) employees and privilege their interest over that of the nation (his nation).

He's beholden to his shareholders and every move they have made is all about that. They knew it would be bad PR but they wanted to make money so they took the contract initially and tried to keep it quite. Then, all the leaks happened causing it to backfire, tons of employees and users got upset, and so they reversed directions as they think the good reputation for attracting employees and users will pay off more than military contracts in the long term.

> Remember that Google itself is tainted, being complicit in spying over Americans (PRISM, anyone?). Why shouldn't such an entity be regulated?

It wasn't just Google that had to comply with prism. They as long with every other company that wants to operate in the US had to comply with it because every company has to comply with the laws of each country they operate in.