Live data from Hacker News

About Google's approach to research publication – Jeff Dean

docs.google.com

431–440 of 607 posts

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

#431

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is totally not the same thing as telling your fellow employees to stop working. I like to think I’m a pretty reasonable fellow, but it’s hard to see that point of view. I felt similarly to you yesterday. Now I’m not so sure. It sounds like she was criticizing company process and was frustrated not being able to have any impact on what she perceived were real problems to the integrity of the process. I can empath…

How is saying "stop writing your documents because it doesn’t make a difference" "totally not the same thing as telling your fellow employees to stop working"? Assuming your fellow employees are writing those documents for their job, isn't telling them to stop doing that exactly the same thing?

She was saying that right now, even if you write such documents, your work essentially won't matter due to some perceived problem with the process. Or at least that's how I read it.

You're not wrong. But it's also the least charitable interpretation anyone could have. Why would anyone tell their coworkers "Stop working, go to McDonalds instead"? Nobody would do that, because that would be both unhelpful and dumb.

Now, maybe it's true that she was telling her coworkers to come play dota 2 with her for 8 hours on company time. But without far more context, we can't know. And there's almost zero additional information here.

Think about how you'd want to be judged. Would you want someone to take a single sentence, stripped of context, and parade it around as if you'd said something you didn't? I wouldn't.

Listen, yesterday I was in complete agreement with you and the other commenter. I felt like she might have been an entitled employee, spreading drama wherever she went, and that Google had been generous to humor her for as long as they did. But today I'm (un)surprised to find myself feeling like I was being a judgmental ass based on very little information.

Her actions seemed crazy, but now that the dust has settled, it seems like her heart was probably in the right place, and that Jeff was giving her an exceptionally hard time for unclear reasons. Her reaction reminds me very much of how I acted at the breaking point. It gets exhausting to try to work around someone who is determined to stand in your way.

The principle of charity applies: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principle_of_charity#:~:text=I....

You'd be correct to say that I'm guilty of the same thing in reverse: I'm extrapolating far in the other direction, inventing all kinds of plausible-sounding stories about bully managers and such. But it doesn't feel like mental gymnastics to read her comment as "I am extremely frustrated and disappointed that writing these papers seems not to matter whatsoever, and we should probably take a hard look at whether we're having any effect."

That boils right down to "stop writing your documents because it doesn't make a difference," just offensively curt. And yes, phrasing does matter, but people keep saying she said X when it sounds like she said Y.

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

#432
Jeff Dean has(/had) a cult following at Google. Internally, there was even a large collection of Jeff Dean jokes (like Chuck Norris jokes of yesteryear).

It is sad to see him drop his credibility and become a PR mouthpiece. I know how this happens and I know why. But it is still sad to watch. Like watching you favourite band sell out to a big label.

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

#433
post #2

Maybe different teams are different, but on my previous team within Google AI, we thought the goal of google's pubapproval process was to ensure that internal company IP (eg. details about datasets, details about google compute infra) does not leak to the public, and maybe to shield Google from liability. Nothing more. In all of my time at Google AI, I never heard of pubapproval being used for peer review or to criti…

We know large language models are super important to google, and there are lots of competitors. If they approved the paper the message would be "google thinks language models are a waste of resources and racist". There would be no academic debate on this topic as its been framed as woke and published by a militant activist, so any disagreement would be racist (see prior interactions between this researcher and other…

She's got solid STEM credentials. If google managed to hire a "woke militant activist" instead of what they wanted... is that really much better?

Demand the best from your multi-billion dollar corporations.

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

#434
post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Now might be a good time to remind everyone that the easiest way to discriminate is to make stringent rules, then to decide when and for whom to enforce them. --Nicolas Le Roux

It would be pretty easy to discriminate if you had loose underspecified rules, then decide action on a case by case basis. The problem seems to not be in the rules but in the deciding.

Why can't it be both? I once observed an instance very early in my career, while working in an employment litigation office where rules were explicitly created in order to box an individual in such that their actions, while completely legal and moral and in the course of their professional duties could be used as grounds for dismissal "because policy".

A lawsuit emerged. A settlement followed.

Just because "we made rules for this" doesn't mean the scrutiny should suddenly cease.

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

#435

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not "runaway activism" if you hire ethics researchers who find ethics problems. Reasons for not citing research, especially recent research, range from lack of relevance (since even though environmental improvements could have been done, they were not done! So the actual impact wasnt lessened by them at all!); To simply not having known about it. The correct reviewer response to this would be an "accept with cor…

> It's not "runaway activism" if you hire ethics researchers who find ethics problems. The fundamental difference between activism and research is that activism sets the agenda ahead of time while research explores the knowledge space and reports findings. One helps us incrementally make better sense of the world, the other wants us to narrow on particular facts while omitting other relevant facts in the name of adva…

You seem to have an exceptionally narrow view of research; notably, that you can't start with a thing you want to prove, which is in fact step 2 of the elementary-school scientific method. You disagree with the conclusions, so like Google, you have retroactively declared the research incompetent. You seem to think this is within their rights, but this renders any future research from them irrevocably tainted -- from now on, it's no more than Google PR.

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

#436
post #2

Maybe different teams are different, but on my previous team within Google AI, we thought the goal of google's pubapproval process was to ensure that internal company IP (eg. details about datasets, details about google compute infra) does not leak to the public, and maybe to shield Google from liability. Nothing more. In all of my time at Google AI, I never heard of pubapproval being used for peer review or to criti…

We know large language models are super important to google, and there are lots of competitors. If they approved the paper the message would be "google thinks language models are a waste of resources and racist". There would be no academic debate on this topic as its been framed as woke and published by a militant activist, so any disagreement would be racist (see prior interactions between this researcher and other…

I have to assume both sides here are adults that can deal with criticism of their chosen discipline without immediately resigning, or not joining a specific company over it.

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

#437
post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> While I’m a spectator to this unfolding story and am reacting to a pretty cursory overview of what happened, this has the distinct feeling that Google thought they were moving in for a checkmate by, in their words, “accepting a resignation”, only to have it — very predictably? - blow up in their faces completely. I wouldn't say this has blown up in their face. But to be honest, I've not seen that much drama about i…

I don’t think you’re incorrect on any particular point. Just anecdotally, I don’t think a man sending a “do x or I’ll quit” email would be met with the same response. I think issues of race and gender are playing a role here, and that’s a shame, because while firing (accepting this resignation) of this researcher might make short term business sense, it seems like it does harm to Google’s long term credibility in try…

[deleted]

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

#438
Jeff Dean is lying:

https://twitter.com/timnitGebru/status/1335017524937756672

> 1/Man there’s so much to pick apart. Let’s start with one thing. I want to ask if Jeff Dean has looked at the publication approval policy that he keeps on mentioning in his email. Like, for example, a simple look at the website? Let’s read.

> 2/First off “Start the PubApprove process at least 1 week in advance of any deadline”. Okay, not sure where the 2 weeks in Jeff’s email came from.

> 3/ But ALSO “The perfect policy” “There is no such thing as the perfect policy. Fortunately Googlers like to do the right thing. Please do that here—read the policy and do what makes sense.”

> 4/ ALSO “Meanwhile, we strive to make the PubApprove process as lightweight as possible: hopefully eliminating the temptation to skip it.” I don’t know man you might have to resign immediately if you just “do what makes sense” so beware.

> 5/ Finally, I wouldn’t want to know what would happen to you if you had “the temptation to skip it” mentioned on the website. Beware researchers

> 6/In spite of this, we gave a heads up BEFORE even writing the paper—on September 18. Saying that we were about to write this paper. So much to say here, so much. But I’ll stop here for now.

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

#439

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you're coming at the ultimatum from some sort of strange power dynamic perspective, where an employee who successfully gets their ultimatum approved somehow disenfranchises their manager of their authority, enabling future employees to…what? Vie for the managerial position? This has a "crush dissent" kind of vibe. In every employment contract there is a balance of things and employee is willing to do and an e…

Critical race/gender theory is all about power dynamics permeating every interaction. You might think that's exhausting, I certainly do, but that's what we're dealing with here.

You might think that's exhausting, I certainly do

Why? Is there something about CRT that threatens your means and way of living, or is it forcing a type of introspection about what minorities have and continue to go through in various forms and machinations you'd rather not entertain?

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

#440

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, they're describing a particular scenario where the Political Officers of those norms wind up being a sick joke of careerism and weaponized ideology. The Soviet Union was about equality for workers. Who could be against that?

I think you replied to the wrong comment. You start off by disagreeing with something but it does not seem to be anything I wrote in this thread.

I should have been more precise. The phenomenon the other poster was describing is independent of a particular norm or ideology. Talk of evolving norms misses their point.
Post reply on HN