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

91–100 of 266 posts

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

#91

Post by rafiki6 »

geofft wrote: post #10
IshKebab wrote: post #5

I thought she offered her resignation and they accepted?

She offered to resign on a particular schedule to work out things with her team if they insisted on retracting the paper. They terminated her employment immediately, while she was on vacation, because of an email she sent to the ERG about it, and they didn't even inform her direct manager. Whatever they accepted, it wasn't the resignation she offered. (And even if they had done so, I expect the folks here to remain u…

This is just not how employment works, really anywhere in the world. The company is well within it's right to ask you to leave earlier to protect it's IP.

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

#92

Post by tinalumfoil »

yulaow wrote: post #32
dmarchand90 wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the subtle, yet important, difference is that she said she would quit by a certain date and they terminated her immediately. Given her role is likely just for PR it seems rather foolish not to at least give her two weeks notice or something.

In her group email she also asked other employees to stop working in any other related project. I mean, I don't see how google could NOT terminate her after such an event. I am in a nation with extremly strong worker protection law but that action alone would be enough to fire you on the spot.

Reading the comments here I feel like HN lives in a completely parallel universe. The number of employees who have the ability to threaten to quit and not immediately get fired are very very few. Even at the executive level you can't just make ultimatums for your employment and expect that they won't consider just firing you. Even if you're the representative of a union speaking on behalf of thousands of employees you need make sure you have enough leverage before making demands like that.

This not some crazy conspiracy that she got fired. It would be noteworthy if someone who did what she did didn't get fired.

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

#93

Post by jlokier »

miked85 wrote: post #22
geofft wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

She offered to resign on a particular schedule to work out things with her team if they insisted on retracting the paper. They terminated her employment immediately, while she was on vacation, because of an email she sent to the ERG about it, and they didn't even inform her direct manager. Whatever they accepted, it wasn't the resignation she offered. (And even if they had done so, I expect the folks here to remain u…

> She offered to resign on a particular schedule It is not out of the ordinary at all for companies to walk people out on the day of resignation. The company is not required or even expected to abide by whatever schedule is presented to them.

If the employee says "I'm giving you 1 month formal notice of resignation", and the company responds with "effective immediately you are terminated without pay or benefits", at that point it's not a resignation any more, it's a termination.

In most countries (which are not "at will"), I believe if the employee had not breached their contract they could claim wrongful termination in this scenario and likely be awarded the pay they would have received for the missing notice period.

This doesn't mean the company is obliged to keep the employee on premises, on the network, active etc. It is not uncommon to ask the employee to leave the premises, have security walk them out, disconnect from the network etc out of security/IP/morale/whatever concerns. But they would still be either technically employed and paid while the notice worked out or paid in lieu of notice.

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

#94

Post by claudiawerner »

rwj wrote: post #68
geofft wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wanting to know which coworkers are raising feedback in a process that does not provide for anonymous feedback in the first place is not "doxxing" them. (EDIT: Note that this particular process was not a peer review process - academic peer review is done by people from another institution , and selected by the venue after submitting a paper. This was a pre-submission internal review process which has never been bille…

Peer review for academic papers is typically anonymous. She would have been familiar with the process. In the end, the editor (in this case the manager) takes responsibility for the decision.

Generally you get some explanation with peer review, to revise and submit. It's a process of revisions and improvements. As far as I've read, not only did the authors not receive any such actionable feedback, but actually a demand to retract. In her shoes, I would think many of us would want to know who is the one behind a decision like that. Someone is putting a roadblock in the standard process and normal execution of my job.

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

#96

Post by rafiki6 »

op03 wrote: post #75
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…

Big Corps have always been taken that stance. Google managers must be saying the same thing up and down the food chain. But the fact that it hasn't stopped walkouts is interesting. It means there are influential people within who back the walkouts.

Or more likely, the corps realize that the walkouts are an ineffective form of virtue signaling and it would be a PR nightmare to do anything about them, so might as well let them happen since they really mean very little.

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

#98

Post by pmoriarty »

InTheArena wrote: post #57

Google is an company that demands extraordinarily high ideological conformance from its workers. Unfortunately for Google it new longer controls the exact specification of what is and is not acceptable thought at Google, and much like the French revolution it’s being pushed into directions that is management may or may not agree with. What should be a fairly reasonable question – is this person a good employee or not…

"What should be a fairly reasonable question – is this person a good employee or not is immediately contaminated by questions they have nothing to do with job performance."

There are all sorts of non-performance considerations that are important, not just at Google, but at pretty much every other company.

One of those considerations is ethics. Another is legality. Another is public relations.

Which of these do you think companies should ignore?

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

#99

Post by brayhite »

w1ntermute wrote: post #48
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…

It’s just another example of the “participation culture” that modern parenting and social media have made commonplace. Who needs to do anything real when you can just upvote or retweet? You get the same sort of participation trophy that you’ve been taught to aim for since childhood.

This is such a bad-faith, shallow take. Ascribing the act of bringing awareness to “participation trophies” is nonsense.

I also disagree with the parent. Bringing change is almost always easiest from within. “Don’t like it? Leave.” stances aim to do more to attack the person involved than it does to take a critical look at whatever problem it is that’s being discussed.

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

#100

Post by tertius »

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.

A boss controls the work that you, via a contract, agreed to do.

If you want out of the contract the boss cannot make you do the work. You have agency, they cannot threaten you with violence as a dictator could.

Post reply on HN