14 ms·

look I get it - ivies attract best and brightest and the incentive structure for businesses is such that things like this make sense (as a recruitment tool) but

look I get it - ivies attract best and brightest and the incentive structure for businesses is such that things like this make sense (as a recruitment tool) but why not drop this kind of program on a good-not-ivy state school? there are so many to pick from (um Ann arbor, ut Austin, UF, stonybrook, CUNY, etc). it's just strikes me as very similar to wealthy donors donating back to ivies - like c'mon what is marginal utility of that.

wholien 8y ago
Seems like there was already a relationship between the two profs and Google, so might just be extra funding. Google (and microft and...) do support (fund) labs at most of the schools you listed.
defen 8y ago
Princeton has an extremely strong mathematics department (possibly the best in the world) plus the IAS is nearby. Perhaps they are looking for close collaboration with pure mathematicians? My understanding is that there are not very strong theoretical underpinnings to most of the machine learning techniques in use today.
- auntienomen 8y ago
  Indeed, the IAS has an upcoming program on machine learning.
  - cilefen 8y ago
    The IAS program is underway since 2017 http://www.math.ias.edu/theoretical_machine_learning http://www.math.ias.edu/theoretical_machine_learning
    - auntienomen 8y ago
      Yes, although the special one year program (with lots of shorter term guests) doesn't kick off until 2019.
- mlevental 8y ago
  as far as i can tell from perusing the literature for the last ~year very few people care about theory in ML
  - hnuser355 8y ago
    ? I know people at most schools I pay attention to getting paid to specifically work on that. In fact this is what probably one of the most famous applied mathematicians in certain engineering crowds (Ingrid Daubechies) is working on for her big project from what i understand
- tnecniv 8y ago
  > My understanding is that there are not very strong theoretical underpinnings to most of the machine learning techniques in use today. Yes, particularly with regards to generalization. There's a large number of theorists racing to explain that.
- Zophike1 8y ago
  > My understanding is that there are not very strong theoretical underpinnings to most of the machine learning techniques in use today. I wonder how come this is the case from looking at ArXiv, it seems there are plenty of low-hanging fruit relating to the Foundations of Machine Learning.
aetimmes 8y ago
There's probably some long-term strategizing going on here, as well. The likelihood of a CS undergrad from Princeton creating their own startup that cuts into Alphabet's margins somewhere is much higher than the probability of a student from a state school doing the same. To speak nothing of the professors...
- ryanmercer 8y ago
  >To speak nothing of the professors... This probably had a lot to do with it. Schools like that have huge endowments (Princeton's is north of 20 billion dollars), and as such can afford to attract very good faculty. Very good faculty can lead to very bright students. Princeton is also going to have a lot more defense dealings than something like a state school and where cutting-edge tech is being researched, OGAs are guaranteed to be sniffing around and weaseling their way into the research with funding.
- mav3rick 8y ago
  That most likely has nothing to do with it. These sort of things happen with previous relationships of some faculty with academics inside Google. There is no "long term" play of let's quash the competitors. Higher ranked schools are often better at research as well, you can get more bang for your buck than lesser ranked schools.
  - Fomite 8y ago
    > Higher ranked schools are often better at research as well, you can get more bang for your buck than lesser ranked schools. Note that this depends on what you want for "bang". At less well-heeled schools, a far more modest donation can steer departments etc.
    - throwawayjava 8y ago
      They want collaboration and access to great minds, not influence. Also, every if they did want influence, the ivy pay would make even more sense bc the ivy tail wags the academic dog. Better to influence a generation of future faculty than one Dept of current ones...
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
tnecniv 8y ago
It's not too surprising. Many Princeton faculty work closely with Google already. Princeton researchers are also known for being very theoretically focused, including the two mentioned in the article. If Google wants to diversity its research groups to include more theorists, then Princeton is a smart choice.
projectramo 8y ago
Google already has offices in Austin and Ann Arbor. On the scale of things academics are pretty cheap so they can afford to have lots of offices and cover the top 20 schools. Really they should have one in New Haven as well. The prestige thing is not as important (I believe). For instance they had offices in Austin and Ann Arbor before Princeton NJ. The prestige thing is only important for client facing roles (McKinsey or Goldman want to assure the money people that they are in good hands).
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
hbosch 8y ago
In my opinion, anything far away from Stanford and Berkeley is good enough.
kevin_thibedeau 8y ago
They're jealous that MIT has two AI labs.
- whymauri 8y ago
  Are you referring to CSAIL and the MIT-IBM Lab? Or is there another one I don't know about.
fluxty 8y ago
It is kind of interesting, given that Princeton's not really at the top in AI (but it would be difficult to be, because they're so tiny--departments like Berkeley have a huge number of AI faculty). But, at the same time, Google already has connections with Princeton, both through these individual profs and through the NY Tech campus (they shared an office with Google before moving to Roosevelt Island). It is kind of interesting in the trend of professors being more connected with industry and spending time actually working at tech companies. It's both interesting from the perspective of engagement (profs can work on real problems) and frightening from the prospective of independence--the companies will inevitably sway which problems profs work on, and of course their students won't enjoy their advisors' attention being scattered elsewhere.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
fipple 8y ago
This isn’t a donation — they want the best return from their investment, and don’t care whom it does or doesn’t benefit externally.

wholien 8y ago

Seems like there was already a relationship between the two profs and Google, so might just be extra funding. Google (and microft and...) do support (fund) labs at most of the schools you listed.

defen 8y ago

Princeton has an extremely strong mathematics department (possibly the best in the world) plus the IAS is nearby. Perhaps they are looking for close collaboration with pure mathematicians? My understanding is that there are not very strong theoretical underpinnings to most of the machine learning techniques in use today.

auntienomen 8y ago
Indeed, the IAS has an upcoming program on machine learning.
- cilefen 8y ago
  The IAS program is underway since 2017 http://www.math.ias.edu/theoretical_machine_learning http://www.math.ias.edu/theoretical_machine_learning
  - auntienomen 8y ago
    Yes, although the special one year program (with lots of shorter term guests) doesn't kick off until 2019.
mlevental 8y ago
as far as i can tell from perusing the literature for the last ~year very few people care about theory in ML
- hnuser355 8y ago
  ? I know people at most schools I pay attention to getting paid to specifically work on that. In fact this is what probably one of the most famous applied mathematicians in certain engineering crowds (Ingrid Daubechies) is working on for her big project from what i understand
tnecniv 8y ago
> My understanding is that there are not very strong theoretical underpinnings to most of the machine learning techniques in use today. Yes, particularly with regards to generalization. There's a large number of theorists racing to explain that.
Zophike1 8y ago
> My understanding is that there are not very strong theoretical underpinnings to most of the machine learning techniques in use today. I wonder how come this is the case from looking at ArXiv, it seems there are plenty of low-hanging fruit relating to the Foundations of Machine Learning.

aetimmes 8y ago

There's probably some long-term strategizing going on here, as well. The likelihood of a CS undergrad from Princeton creating their own startup that cuts into Alphabet's margins somewhere is much higher than the probability of a student from a state school doing the same. To speak nothing of the professors...

ryanmercer 8y ago
>To speak nothing of the professors... This probably had a lot to do with it. Schools like that have huge endowments (Princeton's is north of 20 billion dollars), and as such can afford to attract very good faculty. Very good faculty can lead to very bright students. Princeton is also going to have a lot more defense dealings than something like a state school and where cutting-edge tech is being researched, OGAs are guaranteed to be sniffing around and weaseling their way into the research with funding.
mav3rick 8y ago
That most likely has nothing to do with it. These sort of things happen with previous relationships of some faculty with academics inside Google. There is no "long term" play of let's quash the competitors. Higher ranked schools are often better at research as well, you can get more bang for your buck than lesser ranked schools.
- Fomite 8y ago
  > Higher ranked schools are often better at research as well, you can get more bang for your buck than lesser ranked schools. Note that this depends on what you want for "bang". At less well-heeled schools, a far more modest donation can steer departments etc.
  - throwawayjava 8y ago
    They want collaboration and access to great minds, not influence. Also, every if they did want influence, the ivy pay would make even more sense bc the ivy tail wags the academic dog. Better to influence a generation of future faculty than one Dept of current ones...

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

tnecniv 8y ago

It's not too surprising. Many Princeton faculty work closely with Google already. Princeton researchers are also known for being very theoretically focused, including the two mentioned in the article. If Google wants to diversity its research groups to include more theorists, then Princeton is a smart choice.

projectramo 8y ago

Google already has offices in Austin and Ann Arbor. On the scale of things academics are pretty cheap so they can afford to have lots of offices and cover the top 20 schools. Really they should have one in New Haven as well. The prestige thing is not as important (I believe). For instance they had offices in Austin and Ann Arbor before Princeton NJ. The prestige thing is only important for client facing roles (McKinsey or Goldman want to assure the money people that they are in good hands).

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]

hbosch 8y ago

In my opinion, anything far away from Stanford and Berkeley is good enough.

kevin_thibedeau 8y ago

They're jealous that MIT has two AI labs.

whymauri 8y ago
Are you referring to CSAIL and the MIT-IBM Lab? Or is there another one I don't know about.

fluxty 8y ago

It is kind of interesting, given that Princeton's not really at the top in AI (but it would be difficult to be, because they're so tiny--departments like Berkeley have a huge number of AI faculty). But, at the same time, Google already has connections with Princeton, both through these individual profs and through the NY Tech campus (they shared an office with Google before moving to Roosevelt Island). It is kind of interesting in the trend of professors being more connected with industry and spending time actually working at tech companies. It's both interesting from the perspective of engagement (profs can work on real problems) and frightening from the prospective of independence--the companies will inevitably sway which problems profs work on, and of course their students won't enjoy their advisors' attention being scattered elsewhere.

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]

fipple 8y ago

This isn’t a donation — they want the best return from their investment, and don’t care whom it does or doesn’t benefit externally.