8 ms·

Last comment about it since I spent too much time on this story. As a researcher in the field I feel bad people don't give Google more credit (I have no affilia

Last comment about it since I spent too much time on this story. As a researcher in the field I feel bad people don't give Google more credit (I have no affiliation with Google). They created a research environment where researchers have freedom to work on their own interests and publish papers (they publish more than any other company). You don't find many environments like that outside of academia. I still remember Microsoft Research closing down their research lab in the west coast and sending a huge number of researchers home. I can tell you I always apply when there is an opening. So far without luck. If you're a Google Researcher don't forget how lucky you are.

tclancy 6y ago
What? People should check their principles at the door? They literally hired an ethics researcher and then it appears they fired her unethically.
- mdale 6y ago
  Its a dangerous assumption that a company can conduct ethics research to begin with no? One should just assume it's a highly paid PR group. Academy has it's challenges with ethics and issues of representation in research even without direct influence of share holders and academia supposedly makes huge investments in this area.
- tinyhouse 6y ago
  Did I say people should check their principles at the door? It's a large research org within a large company. Obv it's not all perfect. I'm sure it has some inefficiencies, politics, etc. It's a company after all and people who accept their offer should know they are going to lose some freedom. But it's still one of the best environments for researchers outside of academia. Google should get some credit for that. Not to mention they get paid extremely well. Researchers in other fields can only dream of such opportunities. Also, it is your opinion it was unethical. I'm sure there's a lot to this story Google cannot share. Nothing in this story to me makes Google Research a place I wouldn't want to be part of.
  - bronson 6y ago
    This is top notch flattery. You’re sure to get the job now.
kenjackson 6y ago
This is a poor argument assuming discriminatory practices are happening there. This is like giving Weinstein a free pass because his movies are really good. Note, I’m not saying Google discriminates, but if they do then your statement doesn’t contribute to their defense.
- tinyhouse 6y ago
  Well, nothing in this story suggest they do. They might have an inconsistent review process, like pretty much most processes in these companies - from interviews to promotions. Let's see how many people follow her and leave Google Research due to their practices. My prediction is zero.
  - kenjackson 6y ago
    That’s the beauty of modern discrimination. You never come out and say you’re discriminating. Rather you just apply the rules selectively. An inconsistent process is the best best way to discriminate. My prediction is you will see some people leave Google due to this. Likely those who worked closest to her. Apple is already extending interest.
    - tinyhouse 6y ago
      There is no evidence they applied rules selectively. What I meant by inconsistent process is that it's subjective. These process usually say something like "Two L6+ need to approve...". Then it's assigned to someone and that person can spend 2 minutes or 2 hours on it. Paper reviews are esp prone to that. How likely your paper being accepted is often more of a factor of who reviews it than how good the paper is. The main thing for me is that it was clear the paper would have been published eventually. I've seen it many times - reviewers ask for some changes. Authors make the changes, Reviews are happy. Paper is published. The reviewers didn't ask for anything that would make the paper weaker, nor did they ask to remove any content. I'm guessing she was so mad because they were external people on the paper and pulling the paper out would make her look bad.

tclancy 6y ago

What? People should check their principles at the door? They literally hired an ethics researcher and then it appears they fired her unethically.

mdale 6y ago
Its a dangerous assumption that a company can conduct ethics research to begin with no? One should just assume it's a highly paid PR group. Academy has it's challenges with ethics and issues of representation in research even without direct influence of share holders and academia supposedly makes huge investments in this area.
tinyhouse 6y ago
Did I say people should check their principles at the door? It's a large research org within a large company. Obv it's not all perfect. I'm sure it has some inefficiencies, politics, etc. It's a company after all and people who accept their offer should know they are going to lose some freedom. But it's still one of the best environments for researchers outside of academia. Google should get some credit for that. Not to mention they get paid extremely well. Researchers in other fields can only dream of such opportunities. Also, it is your opinion it was unethical. I'm sure there's a lot to this story Google cannot share. Nothing in this story to me makes Google Research a place I wouldn't want to be part of.
- bronson 6y ago
  This is top notch flattery. You’re sure to get the job now.

kenjackson 6y ago

This is a poor argument assuming discriminatory practices are happening there. This is like giving Weinstein a free pass because his movies are really good. Note, I’m not saying Google discriminates, but if they do then your statement doesn’t contribute to their defense.

tinyhouse 6y ago
Well, nothing in this story suggest they do. They might have an inconsistent review process, like pretty much most processes in these companies - from interviews to promotions. Let's see how many people follow her and leave Google Research due to their practices. My prediction is zero.
- kenjackson 6y ago
  That’s the beauty of modern discrimination. You never come out and say you’re discriminating. Rather you just apply the rules selectively. An inconsistent process is the best best way to discriminate. My prediction is you will see some people leave Google due to this. Likely those who worked closest to her. Apple is already extending interest.
  - tinyhouse 6y ago
    There is no evidence they applied rules selectively. What I meant by inconsistent process is that it's subjective. These process usually say something like "Two L6+ need to approve...". Then it's assigned to someone and that person can spend 2 minutes or 2 hours on it. Paper reviews are esp prone to that. How likely your paper being accepted is often more of a factor of who reviews it than how good the paper is. The main thing for me is that it was clear the paper would have been published eventually. I've seen it many times - reviewers ask for some changes. Authors make the changes, Reviews are happy. Paper is published. The reviewers didn't ask for anything that would make the paper weaker, nor did they ask to remove any content. I'm guessing she was so mad because they were external people on the paper and pulling the paper out would make her look bad.