4 ms·

> Said hires have thus far, as far as I can tell, not produced anything of substantial value "As far as I can tell" is doing a lot of work here. I can confirm

> Said hires have thus far, as far as I can tell, not produced anything of substantial value "As far as I can tell" is doing a lot of work here. I can confirm this is untrue. I worked with someone like Gebru (definitely an activist researcher) at a non-FAANG and AI ethics drove 3 multimillion dollar deals. Was a better business case than most I built over that time. Besides, saying they don't drive revenue is a critique of research roles, not Gebru...

contemporary343 6y ago
Agreed: Even if one is cynical (as I am) about the reason these companies hire AI policy and ethics researchers (for PR and to deflect criticisms on how their products operate, far too often) - it is clear that many potential consumers and regulators (!) that are inclined to be skeptical or critical will think more positively of the company. Also, let's be real. How much revenue are the vast majority of AI/ML researchers actually driving in these companies? Sure, someone gets promoted for multiple NeurIPS papers, and it looks great for the company. But most of the time, it doesn't directly impact products and revenue -- in the short-term -- and that's ok. Same deal for AI ethics and policy researchers.
notsureaboutpg 6y ago
It's surprising to many but there's a HUGE market for green-stamping and pink-stamping certain projects, by which I mean corporations can tout environmental certifications or credentials or social justice certifications and credentials to their customers and clients. If SC Johnson, for example, can claim that they are helping the environment and they are 100% offsetting all their carbon waste or something like this, and some hi-fi firm in SF is willing to certify them with a bunch of credentialed researchers, it has huge rewards for the company. I'm willing to bet the same is true for "equity" and other things under the umbrella of AI Ethics.

contemporary343 6y ago

Agreed: Even if one is cynical (as I am) about the reason these companies hire AI policy and ethics researchers (for PR and to deflect criticisms on how their products operate, far too often) - it is clear that many potential consumers and regulators (!) that are inclined to be skeptical or critical will think more positively of the company. Also, let's be real. How much revenue are the vast majority of AI/ML researchers actually driving in these companies? Sure, someone gets promoted for multiple NeurIPS papers, and it looks great for the company. But most of the time, it doesn't directly impact products and revenue -- in the short-term -- and that's ok. Same deal for AI ethics and policy researchers.

notsureaboutpg 6y ago

It's surprising to many but there's a HUGE market for green-stamping and pink-stamping certain projects, by which I mean corporations can tout environmental certifications or credentials or social justice certifications and credentials to their customers and clients. If SC Johnson, for example, can claim that they are helping the environment and they are 100% offsetting all their carbon waste or something like this, and some hi-fi firm in SF is willing to certify them with a bunch of credentialed researchers, it has huge rewards for the company. I'm willing to bet the same is true for "equity" and other things under the umbrella of AI Ethics.