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

About Google's approach to research publication – Jeff Dean

docs.google.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

381–390 of 607 posts

Re: About Google's approach to research publication – Jeff Dean

#381

Post by nickff »

angst_ridden wrote: post #368
nickff wrote: post #345

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, you're assuming she was pushed in 'to a corner where they need to make an ultimatim [sic]'. All I know is that she used an ultimatum to challenge/corner her manager, and he decided to discontinue their working relationship.

She certainly felt that she was pushed into a corner where she had to make an ultimatim. As a manager, it's my job to make sure my people don't get into situations where they feel that threatened.

I disagree with your premise. I abide by Andy Grove's philosophy, which is that the manager's job is to optimize value production by a team. Sometimes the manager's objectives are in conflict with those of the subordinates, and there is no way to avoid the problem.

A leader is not a friend or an ally, they are just a leader; the leader can be friendly and supportive, but they are still just a leader.

Re: About Google's approach to research publication – Jeff Dean

#382

Post by joshuamorton »

angry_octet wrote: post #374
joshuamorton wrote: post #308

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Jeff's statement is a lie. I work at Google, and the publication approval process doesn't normally take to weeks. Any Google employee can verify this, and others have, both in this thread and on twitter. There's some documentation that asks for 2 weeks, but it's not followed, and inconsistent application of policy is absolutely a concern in a case like this. A summary of the events, as best as I can tell, is the norm…

But this supposes that there is some deep and nefarious need for Google to kill a paper written by some AI Ethics people. From looking at their recent pubs I can't think of anything remotely significant about any one paper they could write. Hopefully we'll get a full leak at some point.

If it's any consolation, this also deeply confuses me. The entire handling of the squashing doesn't really make sense given the context I have.

Re: About Google's approach to research publication – Jeff Dean

#383

Post by nickff »

ska wrote: post #377
nickff wrote: post #335

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem with accepting anti-social behavior is that you encourage it. This individual or another will use the same strategy against you in the future, and it will create antagonism and toxicity. No, an ultimatum is a choice between two options; she offered Google a choice, and they selected. Expecting them to try to carve out a 'third way' is just unrealistic. I agree that you can frame this many ways; she could…

> The problem with accepting anti-social behavior is that you encourage it. Not saying it's wrong or right, but couldn't she make the exactly symmetric argument?

She definitely could, and she could present herself as the hero of the story who resigned in protest, but she has chosen a different narrative.

Re: About Google's approach to research publication – Jeff Dean

#385

Post by nullc »

bigbubba wrote: post #360
aylmao wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hope Timnit finds it [1]. Google has it in their email servers but I doubt they'll publish it. [1]: https://twitter.com/timnitGebru/status/1334881120920498180

Surely the email can be found in the inboxes of some of her friends still at Google. Any of her friends that were on the same mailing list could give her a copy. Assuming she has any friends at Google.

The ultimatum was what was sent to management, not the list.

Re: About Google's approach to research publication – Jeff Dean

#386

Post by nickff »

tempest_ wrote: post #363
nickff wrote: post #335

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem with accepting anti-social behavior is that you encourage it. This individual or another will use the same strategy against you in the future, and it will create antagonism and toxicity. No, an ultimatum is a choice between two options; she offered Google a choice, and they selected. Expecting them to try to carve out a 'third way' is just unrealistic. I agree that you can frame this many ways; she could…

Ah the old I don't want to do my job and accept that there "was nothing I could do" which is middle management bullshit. It is fine if you think that, but accept that you are the weak one here. If you want to err on the side of keeping your job it's fine, but don't pretend you didn't make a trade off. You do not have to accept anti social behavior but a good manager would have handled this and it would never have rea…

Respectfully, we don't have enough information to judge whether she was net-positive to the team who was acting reasonably. That's a complex calculation, and I don't know whether management triumphed or failed.

It does seem like she judged the situation incorrectly, as she is now complaining, not gloating.

Re: About Google's approach to research publication – Jeff Dean

#387

Post by xapata »

abeppu wrote: post #378
xapata wrote: post #370

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not the assertion here. A good researcher should be aware of the current state of the field, and thus mention current efforts to solve a problem when discussing that problem. Regardless of who's doing the work.

I agree with you that a researcher should be aware of current work relevant to the problem under discussion. Jeff's quoted email states that part of the issue was that Timnit's paper "ignored too much relevant research", without specifically saying whether the unmentioned relevant research was done by Google. But the parent comment to which I responded, and which I quoted, specifically said the problem was to critici…

> not all participants in this conversation are on the same page about it.

I don't see anything contradicting, but merely failing to add the "regardless" footer. Admittedly, sometimes I read too quickly.

Re: About Google's approach to research publication – Jeff Dean

#388

Post by idlewords »

This letter reads like Exxon-Mobil chastising their climatologist for not taking into account their latest research on fuel efficiency, or Philip Morris laying into their house doctor for discounting the psychological benefits of rich, mellow flavor.

Re: About Google's approach to research publication – Jeff Dean

#389

Post by eachro »

oh_sigh wrote: post #350
eachro wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But in this scenario, shielding Google from liability is actually a primary concern given that Timnit is discussing ethics/bias. A paper on say novel transformer architecture, the lottery ticket hypothesis in a new setting, a new RL benchmark suite, etc is not going to expose Google to legal risk the way ethical AI research often can.

How would publishing a paper open a 3rd party up to legal risk? Research papers aren't laws, and it is chronologically impossible for a research paper to influence already on the book laws.

I can imagine a scenario where a politician who wants to pick a fight with Google uses some of the unflattering findings in the published work as supporting material for why Google needs to be regulated/fined/etc: "Google does {bad thing}. Look at this research report from Google researchers! They admit to doing {bad thing}!"

Re: About Google's approach to research publication – Jeff Dean

#390

Post by kortilla »

ska wrote: post #377
nickff wrote: post #335

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem with accepting anti-social behavior is that you encourage it. This individual or another will use the same strategy against you in the future, and it will create antagonism and toxicity. No, an ultimatum is a choice between two options; she offered Google a choice, and they selected. Expecting them to try to carve out a 'third way' is just unrealistic. I agree that you can frame this many ways; she could…

> The problem with accepting anti-social behavior is that you encourage it. Not saying it's wrong or right, but couldn't she make the exactly symmetric argument?

No, they didn’t give her an ultimatum.
Post reply on HN