10 ms·

Google's Work with China Eroding US Military Advantage, Dunford Says

153 points by Jerry2 8y ago

Ancalagon 8y ago
If ever there were a reason to get politicians on the side of breaking up Google (or any other tech company), I imagine this would be it.
- CharlesColeman 8y ago
  I agree that a breakup of Google might be wise for a host of reasons, but how would a breakup help in this particular case? Some or all of the daughter companies could continue these kinds of relationships post-breakup. I would think a government response to control this kind of activity would involve some form of deglobalization -- such as export controls or other regulations.
  - acct1771 8y ago
    Scatter the cockroaches.
- darkpuma 8y ago
  That's optimistic. It could just as well be seen as another excuse to throw even more money at the defense industry. "Google works with China now, so we need to triple the size of our surface fleet." Now ask yourself, which one seems more attractive to a cynical US politician who wants to bring in more jobs for his state? Does a senator from Texas or New York advocate for splitting up Google because it will open the market for other tech businesses that could choose to headquarter in Texas or New York, but will probably also choose California? Or will they decide to increase the size of the surface fleet, knowing they can get parts of those ships manufactured in their states? I fear the later is more appealing to this sort of person.
  - jsnider3 8y ago
    Honestly, the DoD should just take a dozen of its few hundred billions and spend them on making an AI workforce. That would be a hundred times better for national security than wasting it on garbage like the F-35.
    - acct1771 8y ago
      How could the Department of War (military industrial Congressional complex) profit from that?
- hodgesrm 8y ago
  If so that motivation would apply to politicians in many countries and not just the US. Multi-national companies are starting to look a lot less stable.
  - paleotrope 8y ago
    That was always the flaw in the multi-national company concept. Even if you are completely in the cloud your people still have to live somewhere and perhaps more importantly, your money has to sit in some country somewhere. And Switzerland isn't what it used to be for banking security.
- EGreg 8y ago
  Not sure how a broken-up google would be sharing less with China. The US military is a total centrally planned monopoly itself. Maybe the US military should not be spending so much money on bases overseas, and trillions of dollars unaccounted for. We have 800 bases and the rest of the world has 30. The taxpayer funds all of it, but has very little say or oversight.
- WallWextra 8y ago
  The smaller companies would have even less inclined to ignore a market of a billion people.
- vtange 8y ago
  Wouldn't a breakup/decentralization of Google, or any American multinational for that matter, just hand Chinese tech giants a massive advantage since the Internet as it is now heavily favors large, centralized organizations? I don't see people arguing for the breakup of the tech giants across the Pacific even though they hardly have a better reputation when it comes to privacy, etc. By the way, I highly anticipate that the above argument will be made by said multinationals to prevent said breakup/anti-monopoly moves.
  - CharlesColeman 8y ago
    > By the way, I highly anticipate that the above argument will be made by said multinationals to prevent said breakup/anti-monopoly moves. Zuckerberg made that argument months ago, surprise, surprise: https://www.recode.net/2018/7/18/17584482/mark-zuckerberg-china-antitrust-breakup-artificial-intelligence https://www.recode.net/2018/7/18/17584482/mark-zuckerberg-ch... > Mark Zuckerberg says breaking up Facebook would pave the way for China’s tech companies to dominate
  - coliveira 8y ago
    Not a surprise, this is the same argument the oil industry has used for decades to oppose any kind of anti-oligopoly legislation. Basically they state that the US curbing the size of oil companies will adversely impact national interests in the Middle East and in other regions.
    - forgotmysn 8y ago
      does that invalidate the argument?
      - coliveira 8y ago
        It is a fallacy. If having a oligopoly is bad for the economy, it doesn't matter what other countries may want to do. Why weakening your economy, to satisfy the desires of an oligopoly, will be any better?
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- trkh0 8y ago
  Breaking up "Google (or any other tech company)" is not a reasonable solution to any actual problem, I don't understand how people can casually suggest that.
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
saagarjha 8y ago
Wow, the comments on that website are pretty horrible :/
- espeed 8y ago
  Notice any pattern in the writing style and sentence structure?
mtgx 8y ago
It's amazing what companies will put up with if China only hints at giving them "access to the Chinese market". https://9to5google.com/2019/03/21/nokia-7-plus-sending-data-to-china/ https://9to5google.com/2019/03/21/nokia-7-plus-sending-data-... https://www.lightreading.com/mobile/5g/nokia-at-risk-of-china-ban---analyst/d/d-id/748995 https://www.lightreading.com/mobile/5g/nokia-at-risk-of-chin...
- sct202 8y ago
  Perverse incentives. Stock goes down if you have low growth or miss expectations, and China is such a huge unaccessible market that would be easy gains if the door was opened.
  - apercu 8y ago
    Yep, short-sighted, too. Because in a few years all of your tech will have been stolen by the companies the government forces you to work with in order to enter the market. Obviously google knows this and someone has done a cost/benefit analysis and has decided that they will be personally rewarded so it's worth it. :)
  - president 8y ago
    This growth-at-all-costs mindset is ultimately crippling our society. We are essentially giving away our freedoms and giving into a country that is exploiting this mindset.
- bduerst 8y ago
  Apple included: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/mar/04/apple-users-icloud-services-personal-data-china-cybersecurity-law-privacy https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/mar/04/apple-...
danielovichdk 8y ago
Google should embark on somerhing else in total, at least to get some of My respect. They are such an infantile company it seems.
- kodz4 8y ago
  Good point. How about getting DeepMind to automatically reduce my taxes?
- Pharmakon 8y ago
  Companies aren’t people, they don’t act like people and don’t have a person’s motivation. It’s a dangerous thing to talk or think as if they were. Companies like Google are a collection of people serving their own interests and desire to stay in power first and foremost, sometimes (if not often) at cross purposes with other people in the company doing the same. Incidentally the same is true of nations.
  - danielovichdk 8y ago
    A company is and should have reflections of certain cultureal standards, such as not doing this kind of business with the chineese, when you are Google. It's bad management and a lacks morale. I see companies as people, for sure. Without people and types of people, companies wouldn't act a certain way.
    - chillacy 8y ago
      That's a lot of "should"s and personal opinions that I'm sure not all people agree with.
KirinDave 8y ago
One can't help but wonder if this line of thinking is in some part a consequence of Google's decision to put US government contracts on hold due to ethical concerns from its workers.
- jrbuhl 8y ago
  It is directly related. https://twitter.com/HawleyMO/status/1106247367177764865 https://twitter.com/HawleyMO/status/1106247367177764865
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
president 8y ago
Well, when you have a company for which a large majority of its employees are from countries outside of the U.S., some of which are extremely nationalist and hold anti-American views, you will end up having some decisions made that are anti-American. EDIT: To the down-voters, I don't think you are understanding my post. I have worked with plenty of people who would love to see the downfall of the U.S. Many of the these people are foreign workers. Many of these people hold upper leadership positions in companies in Silicon Valley. Now, what do you think they would say given the chance to work with the U.S. military? EDIT2: To the person that flagged my post - this is why we can't ever have a critical conversation about things that actually matter.
- yingw787 8y ago
  I believe Sergey Brin came to the U.S. from the Soviet Union and was the driving force behind Google pulling out of China around the early 2010s (except for Hong Kong). https://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/google/7503641/Sergey-Brin-My-upbringing-in-USSR-helped-shape-Googles-views-on-China.html https://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/google/7503641/Sergey... I think your assertion needs to be backed by evidence.
  - president 8y ago
    For the record, I'm not asserting anything. I'm merely proposing a theory that I haven't heard many people bring up. Not everything is an argument :)
    - yingw787 8y ago
      That's not an acceptable response. Your comment that immigrants coming to the U.S. are nationalists representing their ethnic homelands and operate with an anti-American bias was highly inflammatory. Many immigrants (including me) come from a background of inter-generational trauma brought on by war/famine/tyranny and very much appreciate the existence of the U.S. and democracy. I think it's fair to say we might even take it personally. If you can't back up a statement like that with quality evidence, you shouldn't be posting in an intellectual forum. I will leave @dang / HN admins to mod.
jorblumesea 8y ago
I think it's ironic that partnerships with the Pentagon get axed, but projects with an authoritarian state go forward. Seems like a double standard.
- mc32 8y ago
  It probably has to do with potential revenue. They can afford their signaling when it’s relatively small money but they can’t pass up big money.
- apercu 8y ago
  Because power corrupts.
- ehsankia 8y ago
  Which project with authoritarian state went forward? https://theintercept.com/2018/12/17/google-china-censored-search-engine-2/ https://theintercept.com/2018/12/17/google-china-censored-se...
  - pdimitar 8y ago
    There was an article lately here at HN showing that there is a high probability the project didn't end. It just became secretive. Not sure what I believe personally but if there are big money involved then I'd lean to believe that Google made a PR stunt (which your article advertises) and just got employees who can keep quiet to work on Dragonfly.
FourierTformed 8y ago
What military advantage does Google give the U.S. government?
- president 8y ago
  They are refusing to work with the U.S. military yet cooperating with China to help advance their AI technology. In some sense, this could be seen as leaving your own in the dust while helping "others".
  - bduerst 8y ago
    Google refused to work on the machine vision for U.S. military drones that kill thousands of people (project maven). [1] Google's work in China is building an AI center to promote AI in general. [2] These are not the same things. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artificial_intelligence_arms_race#Disassociation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artificial_intelligence_arms_r... [2] http://fortune.com/2017/12/13/google-china-artificial-intelligence/ http://fortune.com/2017/12/13/google-china-artificial-intell...
    - yumraj 8y ago
      which would be then used by the Chinese military to work on the machine vision for Chinese military drones that kill thousands of people.
      - FourierTformed 8y ago
        Where are Chinese military drones killing thousands of people? That's Nato's prerogative
    - chibg10 8y ago
      Is Google's AI work in China public though? If that's not the case, I see Dunford's point. The DoD does not have a unit in Deepmind ensuring all of their findings are evaluated for potential military usage as far as I know. Whereas that's certainly going to happening in any Google AI lab on China.
apercu 8y ago
As much as there are things that are suspect in terms of the health and privacy of humanity inherent in Google's business model, I don't know why they get singled out. I did some consulting work for a company. It is private firm that is a subsidiary of a subsidiary of a subsidiary that isn't an American firm. Yet it has tech in the most sensitive places within the US government and DOD. And the US defence firms? Well, they are multinationals and (for money because there is no loyalty) will provide info/data/tech to anyone. Why would they do this? Because if Iran or China or Russia catches up with us, the US government will just give them more money to stay ahead. The out of control capitalism in the US is the biggest threat to the health, wellbeing and security of its citizens. Google is just a symptom. And for the record, I am not a communist. I believe human being need some (healthy) competition and that you should be able to work harder or smarter and get ahead. Just not to the extremes we have developed.
ehsankia 8y ago
This article seems like a lot of speculating and throwing wild theories at the wall. It a big eye-catching headline with very little substance. I understand how Google's unwillingness to participate in DoD programs can impact the US military, but I don't understand the Google/China connection. Does anyone know what the "artificial intelligence venture" is referring to? Is it Dragonfly? I don't see how an exploratory program to bring Search, being developed outside of China, applies at all to this situation.
- paleotrope 8y ago
  My guess is the DoD/USGov is going to be opposed to any transfer of any ai/ml technology to China. I tend to think that most ai/ml news is hyped and highly speculative, but if the leadership in the US is not sophisticated enough to understand the hype cycle, any ai technology that could be put in a military drone is going to be heavily regulated.
  - PaulHoule 8y ago
    Understanding of the hype cycle or not, the trouble is that our government is looking less legitimate by the day because it does not recognize and respond to threats such as climate change and a shift away from democracy that's been funded by our own corporations. Yes, when you invest in China you are investing in communism. You might think you are getting a fast one because workers have no human rights, but try taking your money out and you will see what they think of property rights.
    - RcouF1uZ4gsC 8y ago
      >Understanding of the hype cycle or not, the trouble is that our government is looking less legitimate by the day because it does not recognize and respond to threats such as climate change The government doesn’t recognize and respond to climate change because the voters don’t recognize and respond to climate change. I would guess on a market cap weighted basis, most corporations are in favor of climate change legislation, there is not overwhelming popular support for it.
tanilama 8y ago
LOL, the author automatically assumes CCP trusted ... Google? Who openly rebelled against it in the past? BTW, Google might be leader in AI, but China has its own AI scene. CCP doesn't need Google, period.
gabbygab 8y ago
Is it just google or all business? As china gets wealthier and as they develop, doesn't that also erode our military advantage? Isn't the overall economic growth a greater threat than one company, no matter how important? Not sure why Google is being singled out.
burtonator 8y ago
It's really interesting to think about companies siding with governments now that funding comes internationally as well. The concept of nation states is fading and the rise of corruption and oligarchy may take hold... Saudi Arabia has a massive investment in Uber btw... this really prevents any type of criticism of these companies or the view that they're independent or that they should prioritize any specific country.
csdreamer7 8y ago
I emailed Richard, the author of this article, with the question: "What Robotics projects is Google helping the Chinese govt develop or leaking through a CCP cell?" I am very curious, as I think the HN community would be. I do not want to rehash the other arguments: if it is true Google would be hypocritical for assisting China or the lack of details what this General accused Google on possibly leaking through a CCP cell to do business in China. Also, how true are the claims that companies need a CCP cell (accused by a US official of leaking IP to a foreign) that could lead to IP theft? Would allowing a political party to have access to your trade secrets compromise the obligation to keep the legal protections under US law?
- rchaud 8y ago
  Wouldn't your question be more appropriate for the Joint Chiefs Chairman who actually said the quote? The article writer is reporting what was said at an event. It wasn't an interview or Q&A where questions like that could have been asked.
  - csdreamer7 8y ago
    That is why I am asking the reporter who reported his words. So he can ask the question to the general or to the Congressional reps that grill the general. He posted his email, so I asked him. Reporters have privileged access to executive branch and interact with Congress all the time. They help filter out the noise and get to substance of matters. Also, getting the media more involved in technical matters and getting them to ask more detailed questions from HN's discussion would benefit us all as a country (at least for us Americans and our allies).
- partiallypro 8y ago
  I think one general issue is that Google has an AI center in China, and I'm sure there is 0 doubt from the intelligence community that the information Google's employees there have access to, etc is being infiltrated by Chinese spies. Not to mention just general projects Google is involved in within China itself, and its willingness to pay a price for entry (which is Chinese custom for foreign companies.) So, Google is being a bit of a "useful idiot" in their aiding of the Chinese government, and I believe prior quotes from the Pentagon are saying their aid is "indirect." People can say it's "not the same" because it's just an AI center, instead of a direct military application. But...that's not really how AI is applied, the AI from the AI center within China can be used for military purposes. And given that it is a black box that the US is not directly involved in (unlike China,) the general premise of Google's aiding of China seems pretty apparent.
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
trkh0 8y ago
How? What work with China? Sure the words of a top general are newsworthy but some fact checking would be nice.
moosey 8y ago
The sunset comes for US hegemony for the same reason that China will not succeed long term, or even medium term, for that matter: Decision making that is oppositional to what technocracy would demand. I think that it's fine to take culture into decision making most of the time, but when your process turns a full 180 from what observation suggests is the proper course of action, you will run into long term issues socially, economically, and militarily, and both of these nations are going to run head long into those. What I fear is the damage that they will cause in the run up to these failures.
- ivalm 8y ago
  > what technocracy would demand This is a somewhat complicated issue. Remember, eugenics, humors, etc were all previously part of "technocracy" view of the world. I'm not saying we should embrace religion/superstition/etc as an answer, but decision making in the name of science/technology is not as fool-proof as many believe.
  - moosey 8y ago
    That's why I mentioned observational data as well. The examples listed did not follow observational data, or followed flawed interpretations of data. A contemporary example of the failure to follow what would be a true technocratic ideal would be how we are handling climate change.
_lessthan0 8y ago
Wow, this thread is funny as hell.
killjoywashere 8y ago
The bigger issue, in my mind is the DoD acquisitions process. It is severely out of step with the speed of business, and actively prohibits investing in companies who have foreign funding, esp. Chinese money. They have created a diode that pushes engineering talent away from the Pentagon and China is more than happy to help out. On the flip side, look at our nervousness about China putting money and talent into SV. Are you so sure they're not nervous about one of our companies doing the same?
analyst74 8y ago
Looking from different angle, if Google hires a bunch of Chinese AI researchers to do civilian tech research. Wouldn't that cause a brain drain from the Chinese military and other Chinese companies?
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
cromwellian 8y ago
By that token, Google publishing AI papers publicly erodes US military advantage given that China can use them to accelerate their home grown projects. Companies are opening offices in China as a recruitment drive I bet. The whole industry is trying to buy up every last data scientist. It happens that China graduates more engineers and scientists than practically anyone else and so if you want to set up an R&D lab to snap up new recruits, setting them up near Beijing or tsinghua university isn’t a bad idea, just like foreign companies opening corporate R&D labs near Stanford or MIT.
- freyir 8y ago
  ‘U.S. companies must realize that in doing business with China, "they are automatically required to have a cell of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) in that company and that it's going to lead to that intellectual property from that company finding its way to the Chinese military," Dunford said. "There's a distinction without a difference between the CCP and the government and the Chinese military."’ The argument is that the Chinese government imposes conditions that the DoD could never get away with (at least not easily and publicly), and Google is playing into their hands.
  - cromwellian 8y ago
    Seems like a lot of unfounded claims there. Dunford doesn't even know what projects the Beijing office is researching, for example, what if they're researching better Google Translate models for Mandarin? All of this is red baiting. Sure, China is conducting economic espionage, overlooks domestic players stealing IP, and structures joint-venture companies to benefit their domestic economy. But it's not a playbook they invented, the US during its rise from an agrarian backwater violated British IP on a regular basis, the US also conducts espionage all over the world, including information used to seal deals for the military industrial and aerospace industries. The real question is, how stupid do you think Google management is? After the last time they pulled out of China, do you really think they're going to host any "crown jewel" trade secret projects there? Moreover, AI is firmly in the "publish almost everything" phase. Google, Facebook, Microsoft, OpenAI, even Apple, are publishing ever major breakthrough they come up with. There's very little secrets going on. AlphaStar, BERT/Transformers, WaveNet, NMT, et al, the core underpinning of many products are being openly shared. This is just straight up scaremongering by government spooks attempting to force tech companies into compliance on the grounds of patriotism.
devoply 8y ago
Good riddance to US military advantage. I don't want to live in a unilateral world.
lyrachord 8y ago
Most illiteracies like rhetoric words to conceal evils.

153 points by Jerry2 8y ago

If ever there were a reason to get politicians on the side of breaking up Google (or any other tech company), I imagine this would be it.

CharlesColeman 8y ago
I agree that a breakup of Google might be wise for a host of reasons, but how would a breakup help in this particular case? Some or all of the daughter companies could continue these kinds of relationships post-breakup. I would think a government response to control this kind of activity would involve some form of deglobalization -- such as export controls or other regulations.
- acct1771 8y ago
  Scatter the cockroaches.
darkpuma 8y ago
That's optimistic. It could just as well be seen as another excuse to throw even more money at the defense industry. "Google works with China now, so we need to triple the size of our surface fleet." Now ask yourself, which one seems more attractive to a cynical US politician who wants to bring in more jobs for his state? Does a senator from Texas or New York advocate for splitting up Google because it will open the market for other tech businesses that could choose to headquarter in Texas or New York, but will probably also choose California? Or will they decide to increase the size of the surface fleet, knowing they can get parts of those ships manufactured in their states? I fear the later is more appealing to this sort of person.
- jsnider3 8y ago
  Honestly, the DoD should just take a dozen of its few hundred billions and spend them on making an AI workforce. That would be a hundred times better for national security than wasting it on garbage like the F-35.
  - acct1771 8y ago
    How could the Department of War (military industrial Congressional complex) profit from that?
hodgesrm 8y ago
If so that motivation would apply to politicians in many countries and not just the US. Multi-national companies are starting to look a lot less stable.
- paleotrope 8y ago
  That was always the flaw in the multi-national company concept. Even if you are completely in the cloud your people still have to live somewhere and perhaps more importantly, your money has to sit in some country somewhere. And Switzerland isn't what it used to be for banking security.
EGreg 8y ago
Not sure how a broken-up google would be sharing less with China. The US military is a total centrally planned monopoly itself. Maybe the US military should not be spending so much money on bases overseas, and trillions of dollars unaccounted for. We have 800 bases and the rest of the world has 30. The taxpayer funds all of it, but has very little say or oversight.
WallWextra 8y ago
The smaller companies would have even less inclined to ignore a market of a billion people.
vtange 8y ago
Wouldn't a breakup/decentralization of Google, or any American multinational for that matter, just hand Chinese tech giants a massive advantage since the Internet as it is now heavily favors large, centralized organizations? I don't see people arguing for the breakup of the tech giants across the Pacific even though they hardly have a better reputation when it comes to privacy, etc. By the way, I highly anticipate that the above argument will be made by said multinationals to prevent said breakup/anti-monopoly moves.
- CharlesColeman 8y ago
  > By the way, I highly anticipate that the above argument will be made by said multinationals to prevent said breakup/anti-monopoly moves. Zuckerberg made that argument months ago, surprise, surprise: https://www.recode.net/2018/7/18/17584482/mark-zuckerberg-china-antitrust-breakup-artificial-intelligence https://www.recode.net/2018/7/18/17584482/mark-zuckerberg-ch... > Mark Zuckerberg says breaking up Facebook would pave the way for China’s tech companies to dominate
- coliveira 8y ago
  Not a surprise, this is the same argument the oil industry has used for decades to oppose any kind of anti-oligopoly legislation. Basically they state that the US curbing the size of oil companies will adversely impact national interests in the Middle East and in other regions.
  - forgotmysn 8y ago
    does that invalidate the argument?
    - coliveira 8y ago
      It is a fallacy. If having a oligopoly is bad for the economy, it doesn't matter what other countries may want to do. Why weakening your economy, to satisfy the desires of an oligopoly, will be any better?
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
trkh0 8y ago
Breaking up "Google (or any other tech company)" is not a reasonable solution to any actual problem, I don't understand how people can casually suggest that.

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

saagarjha 8y ago

Wow, the comments on that website are pretty horrible :/

espeed 8y ago
Notice any pattern in the writing style and sentence structure?

mtgx 8y ago

It's amazing what companies will put up with if China only hints at giving them "access to the Chinese market". https://9to5google.com/2019/03/21/nokia-7-plus-sending-data-to-china/ https://9to5google.com/2019/03/21/nokia-7-plus-sending-data-... https://www.lightreading.com/mobile/5g/nokia-at-risk-of-china-ban---analyst/d/d-id/748995 https://www.lightreading.com/mobile/5g/nokia-at-risk-of-chin...

sct202 8y ago
Perverse incentives. Stock goes down if you have low growth or miss expectations, and China is such a huge unaccessible market that would be easy gains if the door was opened.
- apercu 8y ago
  Yep, short-sighted, too. Because in a few years all of your tech will have been stolen by the companies the government forces you to work with in order to enter the market. Obviously google knows this and someone has done a cost/benefit analysis and has decided that they will be personally rewarded so it's worth it. :)
- president 8y ago
  This growth-at-all-costs mindset is ultimately crippling our society. We are essentially giving away our freedoms and giving into a country that is exploiting this mindset.
bduerst 8y ago
Apple included: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/mar/04/apple-users-icloud-services-personal-data-china-cybersecurity-law-privacy https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/mar/04/apple-...

danielovichdk 8y ago

Google should embark on somerhing else in total, at least to get some of My respect. They are such an infantile company it seems.

kodz4 8y ago
Good point. How about getting DeepMind to automatically reduce my taxes?
Pharmakon 8y ago
Companies aren’t people, they don’t act like people and don’t have a person’s motivation. It’s a dangerous thing to talk or think as if they were. Companies like Google are a collection of people serving their own interests and desire to stay in power first and foremost, sometimes (if not often) at cross purposes with other people in the company doing the same. Incidentally the same is true of nations.
- danielovichdk 8y ago
  A company is and should have reflections of certain cultureal standards, such as not doing this kind of business with the chineese, when you are Google. It's bad management and a lacks morale. I see companies as people, for sure. Without people and types of people, companies wouldn't act a certain way.
  - chillacy 8y ago
    That's a lot of "should"s and personal opinions that I'm sure not all people agree with.

KirinDave 8y ago

One can't help but wonder if this line of thinking is in some part a consequence of Google's decision to put US government contracts on hold due to ethical concerns from its workers.

jrbuhl 8y ago
It is directly related. https://twitter.com/HawleyMO/status/1106247367177764865 https://twitter.com/HawleyMO/status/1106247367177764865
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]

president 8y ago

Well, when you have a company for which a large majority of its employees are from countries outside of the U.S., some of which are extremely nationalist and hold anti-American views, you will end up having some decisions made that are anti-American. EDIT: To the down-voters, I don't think you are understanding my post. I have worked with plenty of people who would love to see the downfall of the U.S. Many of the these people are foreign workers. Many of these people hold upper leadership positions in companies in Silicon Valley. Now, what do you think they would say given the chance to work with the U.S. military? EDIT2: To the person that flagged my post - this is why we can't ever have a critical conversation about things that actually matter.

yingw787 8y ago
I believe Sergey Brin came to the U.S. from the Soviet Union and was the driving force behind Google pulling out of China around the early 2010s (except for Hong Kong). https://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/google/7503641/Sergey-Brin-My-upbringing-in-USSR-helped-shape-Googles-views-on-China.html https://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/google/7503641/Sergey... I think your assertion needs to be backed by evidence.
- president 8y ago
  For the record, I'm not asserting anything. I'm merely proposing a theory that I haven't heard many people bring up. Not everything is an argument :)
  - yingw787 8y ago
    That's not an acceptable response. Your comment that immigrants coming to the U.S. are nationalists representing their ethnic homelands and operate with an anti-American bias was highly inflammatory. Many immigrants (including me) come from a background of inter-generational trauma brought on by war/famine/tyranny and very much appreciate the existence of the U.S. and democracy. I think it's fair to say we might even take it personally. If you can't back up a statement like that with quality evidence, you shouldn't be posting in an intellectual forum. I will leave @dang / HN admins to mod.

jorblumesea 8y ago

I think it's ironic that partnerships with the Pentagon get axed, but projects with an authoritarian state go forward. Seems like a double standard.

mc32 8y ago
It probably has to do with potential revenue. They can afford their signaling when it’s relatively small money but they can’t pass up big money.
apercu 8y ago
Because power corrupts.
ehsankia 8y ago
Which project with authoritarian state went forward? https://theintercept.com/2018/12/17/google-china-censored-search-engine-2/ https://theintercept.com/2018/12/17/google-china-censored-se...
- pdimitar 8y ago
  There was an article lately here at HN showing that there is a high probability the project didn't end. It just became secretive. Not sure what I believe personally but if there are big money involved then I'd lean to believe that Google made a PR stunt (which your article advertises) and just got employees who can keep quiet to work on Dragonfly.

FourierTformed 8y ago

What military advantage does Google give the U.S. government?

president 8y ago
They are refusing to work with the U.S. military yet cooperating with China to help advance their AI technology. In some sense, this could be seen as leaving your own in the dust while helping "others".
- bduerst 8y ago
  Google refused to work on the machine vision for U.S. military drones that kill thousands of people (project maven). [1] Google's work in China is building an AI center to promote AI in general. [2] These are not the same things. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artificial_intelligence_arms_race#Disassociation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artificial_intelligence_arms_r... [2] http://fortune.com/2017/12/13/google-china-artificial-intelligence/ http://fortune.com/2017/12/13/google-china-artificial-intell...
  - yumraj 8y ago
    which would be then used by the Chinese military to work on the machine vision for Chinese military drones that kill thousands of people.
    - FourierTformed 8y ago
      Where are Chinese military drones killing thousands of people? That's Nato's prerogative
  - chibg10 8y ago
    Is Google's AI work in China public though? If that's not the case, I see Dunford's point. The DoD does not have a unit in Deepmind ensuring all of their findings are evaluated for potential military usage as far as I know. Whereas that's certainly going to happening in any Google AI lab on China.

apercu 8y ago

As much as there are things that are suspect in terms of the health and privacy of humanity inherent in Google's business model, I don't know why they get singled out. I did some consulting work for a company. It is private firm that is a subsidiary of a subsidiary of a subsidiary that isn't an American firm. Yet it has tech in the most sensitive places within the US government and DOD. And the US defence firms? Well, they are multinationals and (for money because there is no loyalty) will provide info/data/tech to anyone. Why would they do this? Because if Iran or China or Russia catches up with us, the US government will just give them more money to stay ahead. The out of control capitalism in the US is the biggest threat to the health, wellbeing and security of its citizens. Google is just a symptom. And for the record, I am not a communist. I believe human being need some (healthy) competition and that you should be able to work harder or smarter and get ahead. Just not to the extremes we have developed.

ehsankia 8y ago

This article seems like a lot of speculating and throwing wild theories at the wall. It a big eye-catching headline with very little substance. I understand how Google's unwillingness to participate in DoD programs can impact the US military, but I don't understand the Google/China connection. Does anyone know what the "artificial intelligence venture" is referring to? Is it Dragonfly? I don't see how an exploratory program to bring Search, being developed outside of China, applies at all to this situation.

paleotrope 8y ago
My guess is the DoD/USGov is going to be opposed to any transfer of any ai/ml technology to China. I tend to think that most ai/ml news is hyped and highly speculative, but if the leadership in the US is not sophisticated enough to understand the hype cycle, any ai technology that could be put in a military drone is going to be heavily regulated.
- PaulHoule 8y ago
  Understanding of the hype cycle or not, the trouble is that our government is looking less legitimate by the day because it does not recognize and respond to threats such as climate change and a shift away from democracy that's been funded by our own corporations. Yes, when you invest in China you are investing in communism. You might think you are getting a fast one because workers have no human rights, but try taking your money out and you will see what they think of property rights.
  - RcouF1uZ4gsC 8y ago
    >Understanding of the hype cycle or not, the trouble is that our government is looking less legitimate by the day because it does not recognize and respond to threats such as climate change The government doesn’t recognize and respond to climate change because the voters don’t recognize and respond to climate change. I would guess on a market cap weighted basis, most corporations are in favor of climate change legislation, there is not overwhelming popular support for it.

tanilama 8y ago

LOL, the author automatically assumes CCP trusted ... Google? Who openly rebelled against it in the past? BTW, Google might be leader in AI, but China has its own AI scene. CCP doesn't need Google, period.

gabbygab 8y ago

Is it just google or all business? As china gets wealthier and as they develop, doesn't that also erode our military advantage? Isn't the overall economic growth a greater threat than one company, no matter how important? Not sure why Google is being singled out.

burtonator 8y ago

It's really interesting to think about companies siding with governments now that funding comes internationally as well. The concept of nation states is fading and the rise of corruption and oligarchy may take hold... Saudi Arabia has a massive investment in Uber btw... this really prevents any type of criticism of these companies or the view that they're independent or that they should prioritize any specific country.

csdreamer7 8y ago

I emailed Richard, the author of this article, with the question: "What Robotics projects is Google helping the Chinese govt develop or leaking through a CCP cell?" I am very curious, as I think the HN community would be. I do not want to rehash the other arguments: if it is true Google would be hypocritical for assisting China or the lack of details what this General accused Google on possibly leaking through a CCP cell to do business in China. Also, how true are the claims that companies need a CCP cell (accused by a US official of leaking IP to a foreign) that could lead to IP theft? Would allowing a political party to have access to your trade secrets compromise the obligation to keep the legal protections under US law?

rchaud 8y ago
Wouldn't your question be more appropriate for the Joint Chiefs Chairman who actually said the quote? The article writer is reporting what was said at an event. It wasn't an interview or Q&A where questions like that could have been asked.
- csdreamer7 8y ago
  That is why I am asking the reporter who reported his words. So he can ask the question to the general or to the Congressional reps that grill the general. He posted his email, so I asked him. Reporters have privileged access to executive branch and interact with Congress all the time. They help filter out the noise and get to substance of matters. Also, getting the media more involved in technical matters and getting them to ask more detailed questions from HN's discussion would benefit us all as a country (at least for us Americans and our allies).
partiallypro 8y ago
I think one general issue is that Google has an AI center in China, and I'm sure there is 0 doubt from the intelligence community that the information Google's employees there have access to, etc is being infiltrated by Chinese spies. Not to mention just general projects Google is involved in within China itself, and its willingness to pay a price for entry (which is Chinese custom for foreign companies.) So, Google is being a bit of a "useful idiot" in their aiding of the Chinese government, and I believe prior quotes from the Pentagon are saying their aid is "indirect." People can say it's "not the same" because it's just an AI center, instead of a direct military application. But...that's not really how AI is applied, the AI from the AI center within China can be used for military purposes. And given that it is a black box that the US is not directly involved in (unlike China,) the general premise of Google's aiding of China seems pretty apparent.

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

trkh0 8y ago

How? What work with China? Sure the words of a top general are newsworthy but some fact checking would be nice.

moosey 8y ago

The sunset comes for US hegemony for the same reason that China will not succeed long term, or even medium term, for that matter: Decision making that is oppositional to what technocracy would demand. I think that it's fine to take culture into decision making most of the time, but when your process turns a full 180 from what observation suggests is the proper course of action, you will run into long term issues socially, economically, and militarily, and both of these nations are going to run head long into those. What I fear is the damage that they will cause in the run up to these failures.

ivalm 8y ago
> what technocracy would demand This is a somewhat complicated issue. Remember, eugenics, humors, etc were all previously part of "technocracy" view of the world. I'm not saying we should embrace religion/superstition/etc as an answer, but decision making in the name of science/technology is not as fool-proof as many believe.
- moosey 8y ago
  That's why I mentioned observational data as well. The examples listed did not follow observational data, or followed flawed interpretations of data. A contemporary example of the failure to follow what would be a true technocratic ideal would be how we are handling climate change.

_lessthan0 8y ago

Wow, this thread is funny as hell.

killjoywashere 8y ago

The bigger issue, in my mind is the DoD acquisitions process. It is severely out of step with the speed of business, and actively prohibits investing in companies who have foreign funding, esp. Chinese money. They have created a diode that pushes engineering talent away from the Pentagon and China is more than happy to help out. On the flip side, look at our nervousness about China putting money and talent into SV. Are you so sure they're not nervous about one of our companies doing the same?

analyst74 8y ago

Looking from different angle, if Google hires a bunch of Chinese AI researchers to do civilian tech research. Wouldn't that cause a brain drain from the Chinese military and other Chinese companies?

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]

cromwellian 8y ago

By that token, Google publishing AI papers publicly erodes US military advantage given that China can use them to accelerate their home grown projects. Companies are opening offices in China as a recruitment drive I bet. The whole industry is trying to buy up every last data scientist. It happens that China graduates more engineers and scientists than practically anyone else and so if you want to set up an R&D lab to snap up new recruits, setting them up near Beijing or tsinghua university isn’t a bad idea, just like foreign companies opening corporate R&D labs near Stanford or MIT.

freyir 8y ago
‘U.S. companies must realize that in doing business with China, "they are automatically required to have a cell of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) in that company and that it's going to lead to that intellectual property from that company finding its way to the Chinese military," Dunford said. "There's a distinction without a difference between the CCP and the government and the Chinese military."’ The argument is that the Chinese government imposes conditions that the DoD could never get away with (at least not easily and publicly), and Google is playing into their hands.
- cromwellian 8y ago
  Seems like a lot of unfounded claims there. Dunford doesn't even know what projects the Beijing office is researching, for example, what if they're researching better Google Translate models for Mandarin? All of this is red baiting. Sure, China is conducting economic espionage, overlooks domestic players stealing IP, and structures joint-venture companies to benefit their domestic economy. But it's not a playbook they invented, the US during its rise from an agrarian backwater violated British IP on a regular basis, the US also conducts espionage all over the world, including information used to seal deals for the military industrial and aerospace industries. The real question is, how stupid do you think Google management is? After the last time they pulled out of China, do you really think they're going to host any "crown jewel" trade secret projects there? Moreover, AI is firmly in the "publish almost everything" phase. Google, Facebook, Microsoft, OpenAI, even Apple, are publishing ever major breakthrough they come up with. There's very little secrets going on. AlphaStar, BERT/Transformers, WaveNet, NMT, et al, the core underpinning of many products are being openly shared. This is just straight up scaremongering by government spooks attempting to force tech companies into compliance on the grounds of patriotism.

devoply 8y ago

Good riddance to US military advantage. I don't want to live in a unilateral world.

lyrachord 8y ago

Most illiteracies like rhetoric words to conceal evils.