3 ms·

The irony of this particular piece is that they are publishing emails expressing concern about how the media might frame and distort such an item and doing just

by sqdbps 8y ago

The irony of this particular piece is that they are publishing emails expressing concern about how the media might frame and distort such an item and doing just that. The email discussion is mainly about potential revenue if they were to win the JEDI contract it's not about maven or 'expecting the drone ai work to grow'. Also worth noting that Google isn't the only contractor for maven yet they are made as such in most articles. As for the issue at large: Microsoft and Amazon have recently surpassed Google in market value and that is largely due to cloud, they also manage to not have their employees leak internal material to the press and protest publicly, and I think Google should look into achieving that.

repolfx 8y ago
Google probably can't change that, at least not overnight. The reason Google are experiencing leaks and taking flak for this is that it's only Google that ever claimed to be a superior moral actor. Amazon and Microsoft, for all their faults, never claimed to be much more than tech companies that want to make money - the extent of Microsoft's moral ambition was "computers are good, let's put a computer in every home", a goal which is hard to argue with given the attendant positive consequences of computing for society. Google, on the other hand, has frequently made the following claims: • It won't "be evil", whatever that means. • It has an ethics board, for AI specifically. • That it withdrew from the Chinese search market due to being unwilling to go along anymore with the government's censorship. • That it "believes in the empowering and democratizing effect of putting information in the hands of everyone, everywhere" • From its code of conduct, that "everything we do in connection with our work at Google will be, and should be, measured against the highest possible standards of ethical business conduct" And I would say in general, having once been a part of it, that parts of Google's workforce are quite convinced of their own moral superiority. Look at the relentless feminist virtue circus around the firing of Damore, a man whose crime was merely to point out that men and women have different interests and that's why so many jobs have unbalanced ratios. The company's top management went on TV and said they were convinced firing him was the "right" thing to do. Well you can't do all those things and then get upset when employees start leaking behaviour they feel to be unethical. Live by the sword, die by the sword. Summary: Google gets shit for working on the drone strike program for money, because (a) it has more money than it knows what to do with already and (b) it has constantly claimed to be a new kind of tech company that is ethically superior to the previous generation. Other firms lack either (a) or (b) or both.
- alexandercrohde 8y ago
  Also, Google has reaped the reward of being a superior moral actor for a long time. There was a good decade where google was the coolest place to work in the country. Many of the smartest people channeled not only their time but their passion into propelling the idea of google forward based on that understanding. Some of the brightest minds happen to be idealists and visionaries (Gates, Musk, Wales) who want to work toward a post-war future where information is abundant and there is no scarcity. Putting power into the hands of the few seems like a step in the wrong direction to us idealists.
- j2kun 8y ago
  > to point out that men and women have different interests I was nodding until this. Even if you agree with Damore, you can't pretend his argument was "men and women simply have different interests."
  - repolfx 8y ago
    I've read the memo and that was in fact his argument. What do you think his argument was?
    - j2kun 8y ago
      I've read it many times, and I suggest you read it closer. Try applying that same skeptic mindset used to defend him to the opposite perspective.
- cwkoss 8y ago
  Google just removed 'don't be evil' from their Code of Conduct. The timing around the drone news is interesting. I wonder if this was a deliberate PR move (seems odd) or if this was an unauthorized protest action from an insider who disagrees with developing weapon system. https://gizmodo.com/google-removes-nearly-all-mentions-of-dont-be-evil-from-1826153393 https://gizmodo.com/google-removes-nearly-all-mentions-of-do...

by sqdbps 8y ago

repolfx 8y ago

Google probably can't change that, at least not overnight. The reason Google are experiencing leaks and taking flak for this is that it's only Google that ever claimed to be a superior moral actor. Amazon and Microsoft, for all their faults, never claimed to be much more than tech companies that want to make money - the extent of Microsoft's moral ambition was "computers are good, let's put a computer in every home", a goal which is hard to argue with given the attendant positive consequences of computing for society. Google, on the other hand, has frequently made the following claims: • It won't "be evil", whatever that means. • It has an ethics board, for AI specifically. • That it withdrew from the Chinese search market due to being unwilling to go along anymore with the government's censorship. • That it "believes in the empowering and democratizing effect of putting information in the hands of everyone, everywhere" • From its code of conduct, that "everything we do in connection with our work at Google will be, and should be, measured against the highest possible standards of ethical business conduct" And I would say in general, having once been a part of it, that parts of Google's workforce are quite convinced of their own moral superiority. Look at the relentless feminist virtue circus around the firing of Damore, a man whose crime was merely to point out that men and women have different interests and that's why so many jobs have unbalanced ratios. The company's top management went on TV and said they were convinced firing him was the "right" thing to do. Well you can't do all those things and then get upset when employees start leaking behaviour they feel to be unethical. Live by the sword, die by the sword. Summary: Google gets shit for working on the drone strike program for money, because (a) it has more money than it knows what to do with already and (b) it has constantly claimed to be a new kind of tech company that is ethically superior to the previous generation. Other firms lack either (a) or (b) or both.

alexandercrohde 8y ago
Also, Google has reaped the reward of being a superior moral actor for a long time. There was a good decade where google was the coolest place to work in the country. Many of the smartest people channeled not only their time but their passion into propelling the idea of google forward based on that understanding. Some of the brightest minds happen to be idealists and visionaries (Gates, Musk, Wales) who want to work toward a post-war future where information is abundant and there is no scarcity. Putting power into the hands of the few seems like a step in the wrong direction to us idealists.
j2kun 8y ago
> to point out that men and women have different interests I was nodding until this. Even if you agree with Damore, you can't pretend his argument was "men and women simply have different interests."
- repolfx 8y ago
  I've read the memo and that was in fact his argument. What do you think his argument was?
  - j2kun 8y ago
    I've read it many times, and I suggest you read it closer. Try applying that same skeptic mindset used to defend him to the opposite perspective.
cwkoss 8y ago
Google just removed 'don't be evil' from their Code of Conduct. The timing around the drone news is interesting. I wonder if this was a deliberate PR move (seems odd) or if this was an unauthorized protest action from an insider who disagrees with developing weapon system. https://gizmodo.com/google-removes-nearly-all-mentions-of-dont-be-evil-from-1826153393 https://gizmodo.com/google-removes-nearly-all-mentions-of-do...