6 ms·

You're commenting on an article where a person was fired due to being a racial/gender justice advocate, and you're worried about "Even being accused of being ra

You're commenting on an article where a person was fired due to being a racial/gender justice advocate, and you're worried about "Even being accused of being racist can ruin someone's career in this current climate" ???

1024core 6y ago
> a person was fired due to being a racial/gender justice advocate Nope, they were fired for being a douche.
- wonnage 6y ago
  And this is what HN has devolved to, calling a leading Ethical AI researcher a douche!
  - acituan 6y ago
    > a leading Ethical AI researcher a douche! Ex-ethical AI researcher, we don't know what her next job will be, and she certainly lost an opportunity to lead by losing her place at Google. We are yet to see if this maneuver will cost her social capital or add to her reputation. Also, do you seriously believe being an ethics researcher automatically excludes one from misconduct? From what we know so far, she seems to have overplayed her hand, assumed she should be treated above rules and when failed at it wanted to take names and encouraged mutiny, in a company where she is a junior manager. Not only there are actual legal complications for a manager to do that, it also sounds like narcissistic and toxic. Her goals might be laudable, but she have executed poorly and emotionally, and lost an immediate chance to deliver ongoing impact for the ethics causes she cared about. I hope aspiring activist-ethicist-researcher-techies take note of this. Tantrums don't deliver long term impact. Narcissism clouds your judgement. Impassioned supporters mislead you. You have great power, if you wield it responsibly and pay attention not to overestimate it.
  - anonvenger 6y ago
    While there is some overlap, generally speaking Identity Politics != Ethics. She's an Identity Politics researcher, narrowly focused on race and gender topics. Not some philosopher or religious figure interested in the flourishing of humanity at large. Here is an abstract from a larger work, presumably her PhD thesis: https://arxiv.org/pdf/1908.06165.pdf https://arxiv.org/pdf/1908.06165.pdf. Critical gender and race theory through and through.
    - wonnage 6y ago
      You're trying to discredit her for... writing a well-sourced paper on race & gender discrimination in AI.
      - anonvenger 6y ago
        Well written, well sourced and very narrow for someone that fashions themselves as 'ethicist'. There are more things in life beyond race and gender as seen through the prism of critical race/gender theory. I heard somewhere of this strange word 'love', something to look into. She's young, smart, capable and possibly well meaning in spite of her unbecoming behavior. Perhaps one day she'll grow to see the struggle common to all born of a woman.
    - AI_researcher 6y ago
      Amen. Her paper is citing dated problems in AI models. These problems have been known for at least 4-5 years, and the responsible AI community has been working on it. No progress mentioned. The paper read like an editorial rather than actual AI research.
  - 1024core 6y ago
    You can be both a brilliant scientist (I'm not claiming Gebru is one) and a douche. They're not exclusive.
    - wonnage 6y ago
      Oh sure, Yann LeCun is a douche too. But you pick him to defend and her to call names.
- ehsankia 6y ago
  While they were a jerk, it actually was far more specific than that. According to Jeff's response, first they bypassed a 2-week review process: > Unfortunately, this particular paper was only shared with a day’s notice before its deadline — we require two weeks for this sort of review — and then instead of awaiting reviewer feedback, it was approved for submission and submitted. Then, when called out on it, they made "an ultimatum" and said they would leave if certain demands weren't met. I'm not sure what every demand was, but one of them was indeed disclosing the name of the reviewers. > Timnit responded with an email requiring that a number of conditions be met in order for her to continue working at Google, including revealing the identities of every person who Megan and I had spoken to and consulted as part of the review of the paper and the exact feedback. Timnit wrote that if we didn’t meet these demands, she would leave Google and work on an end date. Jeff declined to meet the conditions, and let them go. Seems pretty straight forward to me.

1024core 6y ago

> a person was fired due to being a racial/gender justice advocate Nope, they were fired for being a douche.

wonnage 6y ago
And this is what HN has devolved to, calling a leading Ethical AI researcher a douche!
- acituan 6y ago
  > a leading Ethical AI researcher a douche! Ex-ethical AI researcher, we don't know what her next job will be, and she certainly lost an opportunity to lead by losing her place at Google. We are yet to see if this maneuver will cost her social capital or add to her reputation. Also, do you seriously believe being an ethics researcher automatically excludes one from misconduct? From what we know so far, she seems to have overplayed her hand, assumed she should be treated above rules and when failed at it wanted to take names and encouraged mutiny, in a company where she is a junior manager. Not only there are actual legal complications for a manager to do that, it also sounds like narcissistic and toxic. Her goals might be laudable, but she have executed poorly and emotionally, and lost an immediate chance to deliver ongoing impact for the ethics causes she cared about. I hope aspiring activist-ethicist-researcher-techies take note of this. Tantrums don't deliver long term impact. Narcissism clouds your judgement. Impassioned supporters mislead you. You have great power, if you wield it responsibly and pay attention not to overestimate it.
- anonvenger 6y ago
  While there is some overlap, generally speaking Identity Politics != Ethics. She's an Identity Politics researcher, narrowly focused on race and gender topics. Not some philosopher or religious figure interested in the flourishing of humanity at large. Here is an abstract from a larger work, presumably her PhD thesis: https://arxiv.org/pdf/1908.06165.pdf https://arxiv.org/pdf/1908.06165.pdf. Critical gender and race theory through and through.
  - wonnage 6y ago
    You're trying to discredit her for... writing a well-sourced paper on race & gender discrimination in AI.
    - anonvenger 6y ago
      Well written, well sourced and very narrow for someone that fashions themselves as 'ethicist'. There are more things in life beyond race and gender as seen through the prism of critical race/gender theory. I heard somewhere of this strange word 'love', something to look into. She's young, smart, capable and possibly well meaning in spite of her unbecoming behavior. Perhaps one day she'll grow to see the struggle common to all born of a woman.
  - AI_researcher 6y ago
    Amen. Her paper is citing dated problems in AI models. These problems have been known for at least 4-5 years, and the responsible AI community has been working on it. No progress mentioned. The paper read like an editorial rather than actual AI research.
- 1024core 6y ago
  You can be both a brilliant scientist (I'm not claiming Gebru is one) and a douche. They're not exclusive.
  - wonnage 6y ago
    Oh sure, Yann LeCun is a douche too. But you pick him to defend and her to call names.
ehsankia 6y ago
While they were a jerk, it actually was far more specific than that. According to Jeff's response, first they bypassed a 2-week review process: > Unfortunately, this particular paper was only shared with a day’s notice before its deadline — we require two weeks for this sort of review — and then instead of awaiting reviewer feedback, it was approved for submission and submitted. Then, when called out on it, they made "an ultimatum" and said they would leave if certain demands weren't met. I'm not sure what every demand was, but one of them was indeed disclosing the name of the reviewers. > Timnit responded with an email requiring that a number of conditions be met in order for her to continue working at Google, including revealing the identities of every person who Megan and I had spoken to and consulted as part of the review of the paper and the exact feedback. Timnit wrote that if we didn’t meet these demands, she would leave Google and work on an end date. Jeff declined to meet the conditions, and let them go. Seems pretty straight forward to me.