16 ms·

After DeepMind’s cofounder was placed on leave for bullying, Google promoted him

AlbertCory 5y ago
One of those lawyerly non-denials: "A DeepMind representative said, 'Our records do not show settlements based on his behavior.' " Note that they didn't say there were no settlements; just that they didn't keep a record, or they destroyed them. In fact, that statement would even allow for a settlement based on something else, where "based on his behavior" is in dispute. Maybe there was a settlement about his speech, and they claim that wasn't "based on his behavior."
arkitaip 5y ago
> Google’s reported willingness to put up with Suleyman's behavior stands in stark contrast to its swift termination of Timnit Gebru and Margaret Mitchell, former co-leads of its AI ethics team who produced research that challenged the company’s direction on large language models. Suleyman is a sociopath who makes Google money - that's why he was promoted and rewarded for his sociopathy.
- chronic2703 5y ago
  > who makes Google money I’m sure you invest your personal portfolio in companies that make less money (lower return) when higher return alternatives are available?
  - lowbloodsugar 5y ago
    Yes, and for obvious reasons.
- aix1 5y ago
  > who makes Google money Could you expand on this a bit? How, specifically, does DeepMind make Google money?
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
prepend 5y ago
This article leaves out why he was promoted. I assume he was promoted despite the discipline, not as a reward. The article doesn’t research whether he’s reformed or still a bully. Or whether the position is important or not. These are important details. Maybe the position is BS and doesn’t have much authority. Maybe he’s learned the error of his ways. Without useful information this article is lame as it seems to link the suspension with the promotion.
- dylan604 5y ago
  As long as it's generating clicks, it doesn't really matter if there's a point
- Gibbon1 5y ago
  > The article doesn’t research whether he’s reformed or still a bully. An adult man being a bully in a professional environment? No one should care about him. Fire him and let him try and find a job somewhere else.
  - vmception 5y ago
    Going by this logic wouldn't Google be that job for him? The purpose of that organization is to capture mindshare, and no other priority.
- truetraveller 5y ago
  "still a bully" Labeling someone a "bully" has become the easy way to bring a person down. There could be personal vendetta. I've read the accusations against him, and they cannot be called "bullying". Need definitive proof.
- vmception 5y ago
  I also don’t have a feel for what people prefer to happen? I don't really understand people attempting to tie prosperity to morality.
- mcguire 5y ago
  As a general rule, in most places, getting suspended means your career is dead. You don't get promoted immediately afterwards.
tvirosi 5y ago
His disagreeability is probably correlated with his track record of innovation and if we cancel every outlier like that our ability to reach new plateaus will lag decades behind than if we only allow nice people to play.
- throwaway984393 5y ago
  A correlation in the "cancelling" (aka termination for violation of company policy) of outliers does not mean we won't "reach new plateaus". You can fire 100 people, and there may be correlations ("they only fired people who like ice cream") but no causation ("only people who like ice cream reach new plateaus"). There is no evidence to suggest a causative link between douchebaggery and innovation in AI research. On the other hand, if our ability to "reach new plateaus" relied solely on promoting people with personality issues, we have much bigger problems.
- lpghatguy 5y ago
  How many incredibly smart people are pushed out of the industry by awful people? By letting jerks run the show, you don't get a chance to see the intelligence of people who these folks suppress.
  - corty 5y ago
    But that works in all directions. There are many kinds of people who cannot work together. I for one, despise the "lets all be friends and never say a bad word" crowd. They drive me mad and drive me to leave. I'd rather have a frank exchange of views with someone.
    - paulryanrogers 5y ago
      In the toxic positivity sense, "please don't be vulgar", or something else?
      - corty 5y ago
        There are many variants. "Don't be vulgar", but also "don't criticize" or "invent something positive to say, only then can you criticize". "Be lavish in your (insencere) praise". All this leads to a (despicable to me) culture of always-smiling emotional liars. If something I did is shit, say "it is shit". Make an unhappy face. Don't smile, praise my performance when cooking coffee and on the side mention that my last project "made some people somewhat happy". But I'm not sure if that answered your question, I didn't fully understand it.
gundmc 5y ago
I feel like this story is overblown. He was clearly a bad manager. From what I can gather, he was placed on leave after an investigation and then moved to a policy position where he does not manage anyone. Calling it a promotion is pure spin.
- Traster 5y ago
  At my old company it was a bit of a joke, you would repeatedly see shit managers become "architect"s. Management were too cowardly to get rid of bad managers, so they were forced to promote them to get them out of their role. So managers who were shit technically constantly ended up with senior technical titles - and everyone knew why.
  - TeMPOraL 5y ago
    Were they bad architects though? It's easy to paint bad managers as bad workers (or even bad people) - but sometimes, they're just bad at managing. In such cases, it's better to shift them into roles they're more suited for than to fire them and hire new people for those roles - existing employees already know the company's procedures and products. Plus, it'll likely be cheaper salary-wise - in our industry, new employees have a much better negotiating position than existing ones.
    - shadowgovt 5y ago
      Google is generally loathe to fire unless they absolutely have to, so this explanation tracks.
      - ramraj07 5y ago
        Except if it’s a black female AI ethicist questioning some choices made by your company I suppose.
        deleted 5y ago
        [deleted]
torstenvl 5y ago
"Misconduct" of "bullying"? With no further details or facts? Unless he was actually committing a crime and Google somehow shielded him from criminal responsibility, this is a nothingburger. When you are responsible for a significant step in AI progress you get promoted. I swear to God, the SV woker-than-thou crowd will be trying to cancel Babbage for "sexual harassment" of Ada Lovelace soon.
- koheripbal 5y ago
  This is why our company has enacted a no-comment policy on all internal affairs. Social media will take any news and dishonestly spin it to their own agenda.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- neolog 5y ago
  There are lots of practices that aren't crimes but which should nevertheless be discouraged within organizations.
  - torstenvl 5y ago
    I don't agree in this context. The terms "misconduct" and "bullying" are far too close to allegations of crimes. Our society is trending toward disregard of the presumption of innocence, and that is far more of a societal problem than having an aggressive and ambitious team leader who cares more about results than coddling. If he committed a crime, the evidence should be presented. If he did not, then tarring him with terms like "misconduct" and suggesting that Google should take retributive action against him are anathema to a fair society. For those who disagree, let me pose a question: what, exactly, does bullying constitute if it doesn't also constitute an assault or criminal harassment? and with regard to whatever residual scope of the term remains, why does that justify denying a promotion to someone behind a project as ambitious and successful as DeepMind?
    - thereare5lights 5y ago
xioren00 5y ago
> “He used to say, ‘I crush people,”’ one former DeepMind employee told Insider The horror...
- paulryanrogers 5y ago
  Is this reaction sarcastic? As if to say "I'm not afraid of people who boast of crushing others"?
  - xioren00 5y ago
    Are you saying you would be afraid of this person for that comment? Part of being an adult is learning to deal with adversity.
    - jonathankoren 5y ago
      Part of being an adult is to give up behaving like — and excusing — a bully.
    - munchler 5y ago
      “I crush people” is an unacceptable attitude for a manager to take regarding his own employees. Whether those employees can handle that sort of counterproductive adversity is irrelevant.
      - xioren00 5y ago
        We don't live in a utopia. There are going to be people that say and do things that you dislike; That's reality. Instead of running to an authority figure to complain every time you encounter adversity, like a child, people need to learn to handle those situations...like adults. Someone acting mean or making an off color comment like this are a fact of life. No amount of safe spaces and down voting inconvenient truths is going to change that.
        munchler 5y ago
sillysaurusx 5y ago
I see a lot of people saying this seems not a big deal, or that his leadership deserved promotion. It’s because this is a second order article. The original, most substantive source that I could find is quite thorough: https://archive.is/wqdkF https://archive.is/wqdkF > "He would ask us to do personal things for him," one of these people said. "He said, 'I need you to write a briefing for me on Russian history and politics.' [...] We had absolutely no work in Russia." I originally made a joke in a now-deleted comment, but then was slightly horrified to hear people excusing this behavior. So here’s a serious one: if you get locked into a prestigious institution under someone like this, run. EDIT: I should have known this would turn into a sub thread about whether it’s ok to demand an AI researcher brief an executive on Russian political history. Here’s another one: gossiping about firing someone across the entire office, before you fire them. This article says he did that. I recommend reading through it. I have to go move into our house now, so I can’t paste everything. Suffice to say, the behavior patterns were not productive. I think people want to recognize DeepMind’s eventual success. Having worked under some effective YC founders vs some Suleyman types, I’ve learned that sometimes a startup can succeed in spite of flaws. And remember, DeepMind was bought by Google. At that point they were the anointed child. Their success wasn’t guaranteed, but it wasn’t as tenuous as pre-billions Google investment.
- temp8964 5y ago
  Why is writing about Russia a personal thing? I think I will need more context to understand this.
  - PhasmaFelis 5y ago
    It's personal because it's not work-related. He would demand people do random, pointless tasks for him to show dominance.
    - ptero 5y ago
      Demanding random, pointless tasks from subordinates is a bad sign, but the Russia example might not be one of those. If a boss needs information s/he can ask a subordinate to make a brief. Sometimes the reasoning behind the important request is not clear to the subordinate and it might seem pointless. A good boss would generally explain, but failing to do it is still very very far from bullying (plus, some important info is gathered piecemeal on purpose to avoid leaking things early). I am not claiming those are applicable here, just that much more context is needed to understand the situation.
Ftuuky 5y ago
> "Employees said Suleyman encouraged them to use private chat groups on Signal and Telegram for work conversations, some of which were set up to automatically delete messages after a set period. Employees were also on occasion asked to delete messages from their phones, a former employee said. They were also told to notify the group once they had done so. > "Mustafa was super paranoid about Google spying on him, so he didn't want to use corporate apps, even though we were doing corporate work," one former employee said. Interesting but I can't wrap my head around its implications.
- PragmaticPulp 5y ago
  Whenever I've encountered managers refusing to use company-provided communications for company work, it's one of two explanations: (Note these apply specifically to managers communicating with their teams. I'm not including ICs who just prefer to not use company comms) 1) Leadership has developed a reputation for routinely reading people's private communications. Specifically, not just for investigating specific events like harassment claims, but just to surveil people as lazy way of seeing how things are going instead of doing the hard work of actually talking to employees to see what's going on. or 2) The person is behaving in a way that would be very incriminating, so they force the team to use communication channels that won't leave a record behind. I can think of one manager who was exceptionally kind and caring in company e-mails and Slack messages, but would constantly berate people from his personal Skype account. If you were on his team, you had to be available in both Slack and Skype, and you could usually guess the tone of the communications based on which app pinged you.
  - renewiltord 5y ago
    That second anecdote is absurd in its ridiculousness. What a crazy person that guy must have been!
    - r00fus 5y ago
      I have worked for one, at a time, also. The feedback loop given the lack of pushback from underlings must really foster a condition where such a person thinks that's the only way to be successful, and could even be rewarded for it when they deliver on projects. I'm glad I don't work in such an abusive environment with my current employment/manager but things change...
whoisjuan 5y ago
Don’t care about this guy, but why would they think that changes in the reporting hierarchy means a promotion? If my boss leaves then I would report to my skip in the interim and in many companies that’s forever. So just because there’s nobody between me and my skip I got promoted? That’s the most dumb rationale I have ever read. This guy was already the head of a prominent Alphabet division. If you move him around the executive structure he could have ended up one or two skips below the CEO without that meaning absolute shit . At that level of organizational hierarchy that’s far from a promotion. He is now the VP of some random AI program that’s way more obtuse and irrelevant than DeepMind. The only clear public signal of a promotion at executive levels is being a VP and becoming a Chief or a SVP. That’s it. At companies like Google and Facebook changing titles doesn't mean that you got promoted. A promotion is going from one level to the next one. This guys was probably an L10 and is still an L10. Blows my mind that they arrived to this conclusion based on such a weak signal.
- shkkmo 5y ago
  So becoming a VP doesn't qualify as a promotion but going from VP to SVP does?
  - HWR_14 5y ago
    Becoming a VP can certainly be a promotion, but depending on the corporation being a VP is just a nice high-level title to give to someone too valuable to fire while you put them outside of the main structure. So, it's a promotion in title but a demotion in duties/authority so it doesn't feel bad to the person.
  - whoisjuan 5y ago
    Going from VP to SVP is most certainly a promotion... In this particular case, this guys was probably an L10 before his leave and is probably still an L10. In companies like Google, Facebook, Amazon, etc; an official promotion is changing levels, not titles.
- floatingatoll 5y ago
  His new job would be considered a promotion from his old job by most tech workers, if it were laid out for them without the surrounding context of him likely being a repeat abuser of his workers. The uncertainty about whether it’s a promotion is brought along by that context, not the facts of the job change itself.
zozbot234 5y ago
Article doesn't seem to work correctly - it throws up an interstitial saying it's trying to access the site, but then never does. Might be down?
Tycho 5y ago
This guy appears to be a self-styled liberal activist operating in the business world. According to this fawning Business Insider piece (did his PR agent write it?), he has tried his hand at fixing climate change, inequality, health care, AI ethics, and so on. https://www.businessinsider.com/mustafa-suleyman-the-lefty-activist-ensuring-google-deepmind-benefits-all-of-humanity-2017-12?r=US&IR=T https://www.businessinsider.com/mustafa-suleyman-the-lefty-a... He dropped out of his degree at Oxford and then founded a telephone helpline for Muslim youths. Then got a job with Ken Livingstone, the politician. This early history seems strange to me. Who drops out of Oxford unless it’s to start a business? You’d almost think he was an intelligence asset of something.
- nicoburns 5y ago
  Quite a lot of people drop out of Oxford because it's an intense high-pressure environment. It may not have been out of choice, even if he's portraying it that way
  - password321 5y ago
    This comment managed to blow my mind. Are we really trying to say the cofounder of DEEPMIND is too stupid / incompetent to have graduated from Oxford and came up with a charity as a front for it?
    - qeternity 5y ago
      He was a childhood friend of Demis. The cofounder title seems to be less profound here.
      - password321 5y ago
        Ok so the new theory is that there is nepotism present at DeepMind thanks to Demis Hassabis.
        qeternity 5y ago
cblconfederate 5y ago
Not a good look for google. As a cofounder is he untouchable?
- truetraveller 5y ago
  Great look. Not yielding to the obnoxious cancel culture.
iamleppert 5y ago
He looks like one of those creepy guys at a nightclub who stands in the corner by himself that everyone avoids. A classic case of overcompensating at work due to severe deficiency in other areas of his life.
- mach_architect 5y ago
  What's wrong with his physical appearance? Would you write the same thing if he was a black man?
random314 5y ago
Just looking at Suleymans credentials, he has literally zero technical credentials. Why is he leading AI divisions within Google? Because he managed to become Demis Hassabis' lackey at the right time? Looks like a standard issue corporate climber who demands work from his subordinates that he himself cannot deliver.
- mach_architect 5y ago
  > he has literally zero technical credentials > Looks like a standard issue corporate climber who demands work from his subordinates that he himself cannot deliver. The people I've seen like this had machine learning PHDs and lots of publications, while some of the most productive had no such pedigree. I'd be careful judging based on "technical credentials".
  - random314 5y ago
    This is not an engineering organization. Deepmind is a research organization led by PhD Hassabis who is the obvious intellectual force behind the organization. All the pioneers of AI from Hinton to Goodfellow have PhDs in AI with a strong publication record. Core AI research is simply not an area where college dropouts like Suleyman can drive research. He is a non technical "manager" riding Hassabis coattails. If Hassabis can get work done without bullying, who is this dude? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demis_Hassabis https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demis_Hassabis
    - jmeister 5y ago
      I have to admire your arrogance. You know better than Hassabis about Suleyman’s value? You want to judge the founders of the top AI group in the universe? I am at loss for words. FYI: Keynes is considered to be the most influential economist of the 20th century, and he had about a year’s worth of training in economics.
dandanua 5y ago
The "don't be evil" company promoted a bully to VP in AI ethics. I wonder how much time we have left until cybernazi arrive.
- vallas 5y ago
  That would make a clickable article
candyman 5y ago
If you are a really smart, hardworking, gifted producer - you should probably do that. The essence of people management is about maximizing the results of each individual, developing them and building a team that is more productive than just the sum of the parts. It's a very different skill set and deployment of energy.
sjg007 5y ago
AI researchers have so many options today. I’d be surprised if this hasn’t hurt Google’s and Deep Mind’s recruitment efforts.
- caddemon 5y ago
  There are also a lot of AI researchers today though. I'm not sure about higher level positions, but for current grad students and postdocs DeepMind is still a very sought after place to work.
  - sjg007 5y ago
    Yes but you want the good ones.
    - caddemon 5y ago
      I mean it remains sought after in top programs. The field is oversaturated from top to bottom, I don't think they will have any issues attracting talent. Particularly not from this story - every academic department probably has at least one top professor worse than this guy.
omarhaneef 5y ago
Here is an observation, make of it what you will: These are the environments I’ve been in where it has been very common for people to scream at each other, both loudly and often: - banking - venture - consulting These are the environments where I have not seen this behavior: - academia - tech - an operating company I’ll tell you what makes it tolerable and normal versus abusive: if a subordinate is “allowed” to yell back.
- meowface 5y ago
  Maybe I'm just sheltered, but I've never worked at a company where I've been screamed at or have heard anyone screaming at anyone. (I have heard stories, but the stories circulated because everyone recognized how atypical, absurd, and unprofessional the behavior was.) Surely this is the norm, and screaming is the outlier?
  - bsder 5y ago
    > Surely this is the norm, and screaming is the outlier? Screaming was seen as a "negotiating tactic" for quite a lot of the 1970's and 1980's in American "business". I suspect there was more screaming when you worked for one company for life because you had to defend your company position more jealously. Now, you leave and get a raise. I would also argue that it is more of a tactic outside of tech. Businesses that like to pride themselves on being "high-stress environments" probably have more of it. In addition, different parts of the world have different ideas as to what conflict in the "superior/subordinate" relationship looks like. Some expect extreme deference; others expect you to squawk.
- zz865 5y ago
  Honestly I wish there was more screaming and yelling. I'm tired of fake smiles and passive aggressive behavior. If you dont like what I'm doing please tell me. I'm up for a proper debate. One of the best places I worked at occasionally one guy would completely throw a tantrum - but then at the end of the day would have a few beers with the guy he was arguing with and make up. People just learned how he was. Ideally tantrums aren't the best way to do it, but some proper communication would be good.
vmception 5y ago
Just to poll the crowd, what do you prefer to happen?
mattfrommars 5y ago
Does anyone know of good resource guide to climb up the corporate ladder? Apart being absolutely good at what you do and learning to communicate, what hard "things you should be doing" takes a good software developer climb up the ladder?
- rdxm 5y ago
  if you want to play the management game learn how to be a sociopath.....quickly.....
nixnax 5y ago
uhh based google?
johnboi 5y ago
On no there is a muslim in the tech scene doing well. Let's exaggerate and try and kick him out.
BlissWaves 5y ago
How is he so important in AI community considering he doesn't even have a degree?
- vallas 5y ago
  who is he?
PaulaFox 5y ago
Hi))) My name is Paula, I'm 24 years old) Looking for a naughty man to exchange private pics 18+ If interested, my profile https://tiny.one/id670344 https://tiny.one/id670344
machinelearning 5y ago
Have to say the obvious thing: Shit like this is unacceptable. Maybe the article is a hit piece with questionable factual credibility. So this isn’t a statement about the person itself but the behavior described by the article. People in this thread seem to be confusing disagreeability and a relentless focus on achieving a goal vs being drunk with power. Both of these things may manifest a similar kind of harshness but they are very different. The kind of behavior described in this article is of someone who uses their (probably undeserved) power to protect their own position. These kinds of people should be removed from an organization as they without exception harm the organization more than they contribute to it.
stablechaos 5y ago
Seeing a link like this at the top of HackerNews is deeply disappointing. Regardless of the accusation or the status of a person, everyone deserves due diligence when it comes to attacks on people's character and reputation. A brief 200-word blurb is gossip, even if she provides links. The fact that she couldn't be bothered to write any more is indicative of how little she cares about whether her criticism is legitimate or not, whether there's important context left out, or whether the statements are supportable by concrete evidence and not just rumor. We need to take stuff like this more seriously, and not just take the words of some random gossip writer at face value.
- truetraveller 5y ago
  It is disappointing. More so, the general attitude of HN. This witch-hunt culture / cancel-culture has got to stop. It's far worse in my eyes than any so-called "abuse". This is abuse.
thereare5lights 5y ago
Wow, I didn't expect this to blow up nor did I expect so many people to come out so vehemently in defense of someone wielding power in such a way as to negatively affect people. It's really illuminating to see what kind of behaviors people take the effort to defend and support. I wish I could say I was surprised but I've seen people speak out in favor of hurting other people far too often.
heisenbit 5y ago
We do not know all the details. We know neither contract nor do we know what disciplinary actions and other communication happened. The title and position sounds better but it seems he lost direct disciplinary power and his closeness to the top also implies supervision from the top. Disciplinary matters are secretive and highly individual. Cases from the outside may look different from the inside. Unless there is a pattern to look the other way I’m inclined to give Google the benefit of doubt.

One of those lawyerly non-denials: "A DeepMind representative said, 'Our records do not show settlements based on his behavior.' " Note that they didn't say there were no settlements; just that they didn't keep a record, or they destroyed them. In fact, that statement would even allow for a settlement based on something else, where "based on his behavior" is in dispute. Maybe there was a settlement about his speech, and they claim that wasn't "based on his behavior."

arkitaip 5y ago

> Google’s reported willingness to put up with Suleyman's behavior stands in stark contrast to its swift termination of Timnit Gebru and Margaret Mitchell, former co-leads of its AI ethics team who produced research that challenged the company’s direction on large language models. Suleyman is a sociopath who makes Google money - that's why he was promoted and rewarded for his sociopathy.

chronic2703 5y ago
> who makes Google money I’m sure you invest your personal portfolio in companies that make less money (lower return) when higher return alternatives are available?
- lowbloodsugar 5y ago
  Yes, and for obvious reasons.
aix1 5y ago
> who makes Google money Could you expand on this a bit? How, specifically, does DeepMind make Google money?

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

prepend 5y ago

This article leaves out why he was promoted. I assume he was promoted despite the discipline, not as a reward. The article doesn’t research whether he’s reformed or still a bully. Or whether the position is important or not. These are important details. Maybe the position is BS and doesn’t have much authority. Maybe he’s learned the error of his ways. Without useful information this article is lame as it seems to link the suspension with the promotion.

dylan604 5y ago
As long as it's generating clicks, it doesn't really matter if there's a point
Gibbon1 5y ago
> The article doesn’t research whether he’s reformed or still a bully. An adult man being a bully in a professional environment? No one should care about him. Fire him and let him try and find a job somewhere else.
- vmception 5y ago
  Going by this logic wouldn't Google be that job for him? The purpose of that organization is to capture mindshare, and no other priority.
truetraveller 5y ago
"still a bully" Labeling someone a "bully" has become the easy way to bring a person down. There could be personal vendetta. I've read the accusations against him, and they cannot be called "bullying". Need definitive proof.
vmception 5y ago
I also don’t have a feel for what people prefer to happen? I don't really understand people attempting to tie prosperity to morality.
mcguire 5y ago
As a general rule, in most places, getting suspended means your career is dead. You don't get promoted immediately afterwards.

tvirosi 5y ago

His disagreeability is probably correlated with his track record of innovation and if we cancel every outlier like that our ability to reach new plateaus will lag decades behind than if we only allow nice people to play.

throwaway984393 5y ago
A correlation in the "cancelling" (aka termination for violation of company policy) of outliers does not mean we won't "reach new plateaus". You can fire 100 people, and there may be correlations ("they only fired people who like ice cream") but no causation ("only people who like ice cream reach new plateaus"). There is no evidence to suggest a causative link between douchebaggery and innovation in AI research. On the other hand, if our ability to "reach new plateaus" relied solely on promoting people with personality issues, we have much bigger problems.
lpghatguy 5y ago
How many incredibly smart people are pushed out of the industry by awful people? By letting jerks run the show, you don't get a chance to see the intelligence of people who these folks suppress.
- corty 5y ago
  But that works in all directions. There are many kinds of people who cannot work together. I for one, despise the "lets all be friends and never say a bad word" crowd. They drive me mad and drive me to leave. I'd rather have a frank exchange of views with someone.
  - paulryanrogers 5y ago
    In the toxic positivity sense, "please don't be vulgar", or something else?
    - corty 5y ago
      There are many variants. "Don't be vulgar", but also "don't criticize" or "invent something positive to say, only then can you criticize". "Be lavish in your (insencere) praise". All this leads to a (despicable to me) culture of always-smiling emotional liars. If something I did is shit, say "it is shit". Make an unhappy face. Don't smile, praise my performance when cooking coffee and on the side mention that my last project "made some people somewhat happy". But I'm not sure if that answered your question, I didn't fully understand it.

gundmc 5y ago

I feel like this story is overblown. He was clearly a bad manager. From what I can gather, he was placed on leave after an investigation and then moved to a policy position where he does not manage anyone. Calling it a promotion is pure spin.

Traster 5y ago
At my old company it was a bit of a joke, you would repeatedly see shit managers become "architect"s. Management were too cowardly to get rid of bad managers, so they were forced to promote them to get them out of their role. So managers who were shit technically constantly ended up with senior technical titles - and everyone knew why.
- TeMPOraL 5y ago
  Were they bad architects though? It's easy to paint bad managers as bad workers (or even bad people) - but sometimes, they're just bad at managing. In such cases, it's better to shift them into roles they're more suited for than to fire them and hire new people for those roles - existing employees already know the company's procedures and products. Plus, it'll likely be cheaper salary-wise - in our industry, new employees have a much better negotiating position than existing ones.
  - shadowgovt 5y ago
    Google is generally loathe to fire unless they absolutely have to, so this explanation tracks.
    - ramraj07 5y ago
      Except if it’s a black female AI ethicist questioning some choices made by your company I suppose.
      - deleted 5y ago
        [deleted]

torstenvl 5y ago

"Misconduct" of "bullying"? With no further details or facts? Unless he was actually committing a crime and Google somehow shielded him from criminal responsibility, this is a nothingburger. When you are responsible for a significant step in AI progress you get promoted. I swear to God, the SV woker-than-thou crowd will be trying to cancel Babbage for "sexual harassment" of Ada Lovelace soon.

koheripbal 5y ago
This is why our company has enacted a no-comment policy on all internal affairs. Social media will take any news and dishonestly spin it to their own agenda.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
neolog 5y ago
There are lots of practices that aren't crimes but which should nevertheless be discouraged within organizations.
- torstenvl 5y ago
  I don't agree in this context. The terms "misconduct" and "bullying" are far too close to allegations of crimes. Our society is trending toward disregard of the presumption of innocence, and that is far more of a societal problem than having an aggressive and ambitious team leader who cares more about results than coddling. If he committed a crime, the evidence should be presented. If he did not, then tarring him with terms like "misconduct" and suggesting that Google should take retributive action against him are anathema to a fair society. For those who disagree, let me pose a question: what, exactly, does bullying constitute if it doesn't also constitute an assault or criminal harassment? and with regard to whatever residual scope of the term remains, why does that justify denying a promotion to someone behind a project as ambitious and successful as DeepMind?
  - thereare5lights 5y ago

xioren00 5y ago

> “He used to say, ‘I crush people,”’ one former DeepMind employee told Insider The horror...

paulryanrogers 5y ago
Is this reaction sarcastic? As if to say "I'm not afraid of people who boast of crushing others"?
- xioren00 5y ago
  Are you saying you would be afraid of this person for that comment? Part of being an adult is learning to deal with adversity.
  - jonathankoren 5y ago
    Part of being an adult is to give up behaving like — and excusing — a bully.
  - munchler 5y ago
    “I crush people” is an unacceptable attitude for a manager to take regarding his own employees. Whether those employees can handle that sort of counterproductive adversity is irrelevant.
    - xioren00 5y ago
      We don't live in a utopia. There are going to be people that say and do things that you dislike; That's reality. Instead of running to an authority figure to complain every time you encounter adversity, like a child, people need to learn to handle those situations...like adults. Someone acting mean or making an off color comment like this are a fact of life. No amount of safe spaces and down voting inconvenient truths is going to change that.
      - munchler 5y ago

sillysaurusx 5y ago

I see a lot of people saying this seems not a big deal, or that his leadership deserved promotion. It’s because this is a second order article. The original, most substantive source that I could find is quite thorough: https://archive.is/wqdkF https://archive.is/wqdkF > "He would ask us to do personal things for him," one of these people said. "He said, 'I need you to write a briefing for me on Russian history and politics.' [...] We had absolutely no work in Russia." I originally made a joke in a now-deleted comment, but then was slightly horrified to hear people excusing this behavior. So here’s a serious one: if you get locked into a prestigious institution under someone like this, run. EDIT: I should have known this would turn into a sub thread about whether it’s ok to demand an AI researcher brief an executive on Russian political history. Here’s another one: gossiping about firing someone across the entire office, before you fire them. This article says he did that. I recommend reading through it. I have to go move into our house now, so I can’t paste everything. Suffice to say, the behavior patterns were not productive. I think people want to recognize DeepMind’s eventual success. Having worked under some effective YC founders vs some Suleyman types, I’ve learned that sometimes a startup can succeed in spite of flaws. And remember, DeepMind was bought by Google. At that point they were the anointed child. Their success wasn’t guaranteed, but it wasn’t as tenuous as pre-billions Google investment.

temp8964 5y ago
Why is writing about Russia a personal thing? I think I will need more context to understand this.
- PhasmaFelis 5y ago
  It's personal because it's not work-related. He would demand people do random, pointless tasks for him to show dominance.
  - ptero 5y ago
    Demanding random, pointless tasks from subordinates is a bad sign, but the Russia example might not be one of those. If a boss needs information s/he can ask a subordinate to make a brief. Sometimes the reasoning behind the important request is not clear to the subordinate and it might seem pointless. A good boss would generally explain, but failing to do it is still very very far from bullying (plus, some important info is gathered piecemeal on purpose to avoid leaking things early). I am not claiming those are applicable here, just that much more context is needed to understand the situation.

Ftuuky 5y ago

> "Employees said Suleyman encouraged them to use private chat groups on Signal and Telegram for work conversations, some of which were set up to automatically delete messages after a set period. Employees were also on occasion asked to delete messages from their phones, a former employee said. They were also told to notify the group once they had done so. > "Mustafa was super paranoid about Google spying on him, so he didn't want to use corporate apps, even though we were doing corporate work," one former employee said. Interesting but I can't wrap my head around its implications.

PragmaticPulp 5y ago
Whenever I've encountered managers refusing to use company-provided communications for company work, it's one of two explanations: (Note these apply specifically to managers communicating with their teams. I'm not including ICs who just prefer to not use company comms) 1) Leadership has developed a reputation for routinely reading people's private communications. Specifically, not just for investigating specific events like harassment claims, but just to surveil people as lazy way of seeing how things are going instead of doing the hard work of actually talking to employees to see what's going on. or 2) The person is behaving in a way that would be very incriminating, so they force the team to use communication channels that won't leave a record behind. I can think of one manager who was exceptionally kind and caring in company e-mails and Slack messages, but would constantly berate people from his personal Skype account. If you were on his team, you had to be available in both Slack and Skype, and you could usually guess the tone of the communications based on which app pinged you.
- renewiltord 5y ago
  That second anecdote is absurd in its ridiculousness. What a crazy person that guy must have been!
  - r00fus 5y ago
    I have worked for one, at a time, also. The feedback loop given the lack of pushback from underlings must really foster a condition where such a person thinks that's the only way to be successful, and could even be rewarded for it when they deliver on projects. I'm glad I don't work in such an abusive environment with my current employment/manager but things change...

whoisjuan 5y ago

Don’t care about this guy, but why would they think that changes in the reporting hierarchy means a promotion? If my boss leaves then I would report to my skip in the interim and in many companies that’s forever. So just because there’s nobody between me and my skip I got promoted? That’s the most dumb rationale I have ever read. This guy was already the head of a prominent Alphabet division. If you move him around the executive structure he could have ended up one or two skips below the CEO without that meaning absolute shit . At that level of organizational hierarchy that’s far from a promotion. He is now the VP of some random AI program that’s way more obtuse and irrelevant than DeepMind. The only clear public signal of a promotion at executive levels is being a VP and becoming a Chief or a SVP. That’s it. At companies like Google and Facebook changing titles doesn't mean that you got promoted. A promotion is going from one level to the next one. This guys was probably an L10 and is still an L10. Blows my mind that they arrived to this conclusion based on such a weak signal.

shkkmo 5y ago
So becoming a VP doesn't qualify as a promotion but going from VP to SVP does?
- HWR_14 5y ago
  Becoming a VP can certainly be a promotion, but depending on the corporation being a VP is just a nice high-level title to give to someone too valuable to fire while you put them outside of the main structure. So, it's a promotion in title but a demotion in duties/authority so it doesn't feel bad to the person.
- whoisjuan 5y ago
  Going from VP to SVP is most certainly a promotion... In this particular case, this guys was probably an L10 before his leave and is probably still an L10. In companies like Google, Facebook, Amazon, etc; an official promotion is changing levels, not titles.
floatingatoll 5y ago
His new job would be considered a promotion from his old job by most tech workers, if it were laid out for them without the surrounding context of him likely being a repeat abuser of his workers. The uncertainty about whether it’s a promotion is brought along by that context, not the facts of the job change itself.

zozbot234 5y ago

Article doesn't seem to work correctly - it throws up an interstitial saying it's trying to access the site, but then never does. Might be down?

Tycho 5y ago

This guy appears to be a self-styled liberal activist operating in the business world. According to this fawning Business Insider piece (did his PR agent write it?), he has tried his hand at fixing climate change, inequality, health care, AI ethics, and so on. https://www.businessinsider.com/mustafa-suleyman-the-lefty-activist-ensuring-google-deepmind-benefits-all-of-humanity-2017-12?r=US&IR=T https://www.businessinsider.com/mustafa-suleyman-the-lefty-a... He dropped out of his degree at Oxford and then founded a telephone helpline for Muslim youths. Then got a job with Ken Livingstone, the politician. This early history seems strange to me. Who drops out of Oxford unless it’s to start a business? You’d almost think he was an intelligence asset of something.

nicoburns 5y ago
Quite a lot of people drop out of Oxford because it's an intense high-pressure environment. It may not have been out of choice, even if he's portraying it that way
- password321 5y ago
  This comment managed to blow my mind. Are we really trying to say the cofounder of DEEPMIND is too stupid / incompetent to have graduated from Oxford and came up with a charity as a front for it?
  - qeternity 5y ago
    He was a childhood friend of Demis. The cofounder title seems to be less profound here.
    - password321 5y ago
      Ok so the new theory is that there is nepotism present at DeepMind thanks to Demis Hassabis.
      - qeternity 5y ago

cblconfederate 5y ago

Not a good look for google. As a cofounder is he untouchable?

truetraveller 5y ago
Great look. Not yielding to the obnoxious cancel culture.

iamleppert 5y ago

He looks like one of those creepy guys at a nightclub who stands in the corner by himself that everyone avoids. A classic case of overcompensating at work due to severe deficiency in other areas of his life.

mach_architect 5y ago
What's wrong with his physical appearance? Would you write the same thing if he was a black man?

random314 5y ago

Just looking at Suleymans credentials, he has literally zero technical credentials. Why is he leading AI divisions within Google? Because he managed to become Demis Hassabis' lackey at the right time? Looks like a standard issue corporate climber who demands work from his subordinates that he himself cannot deliver.

mach_architect 5y ago
> he has literally zero technical credentials > Looks like a standard issue corporate climber who demands work from his subordinates that he himself cannot deliver. The people I've seen like this had machine learning PHDs and lots of publications, while some of the most productive had no such pedigree. I'd be careful judging based on "technical credentials".
- random314 5y ago
  This is not an engineering organization. Deepmind is a research organization led by PhD Hassabis who is the obvious intellectual force behind the organization. All the pioneers of AI from Hinton to Goodfellow have PhDs in AI with a strong publication record. Core AI research is simply not an area where college dropouts like Suleyman can drive research. He is a non technical "manager" riding Hassabis coattails. If Hassabis can get work done without bullying, who is this dude? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demis_Hassabis https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demis_Hassabis
  - jmeister 5y ago
    I have to admire your arrogance. You know better than Hassabis about Suleyman’s value? You want to judge the founders of the top AI group in the universe? I am at loss for words. FYI: Keynes is considered to be the most influential economist of the 20th century, and he had about a year’s worth of training in economics.

dandanua 5y ago

The "don't be evil" company promoted a bully to VP in AI ethics. I wonder how much time we have left until cybernazi arrive.

vallas 5y ago
That would make a clickable article

candyman 5y ago

If you are a really smart, hardworking, gifted producer - you should probably do that. The essence of people management is about maximizing the results of each individual, developing them and building a team that is more productive than just the sum of the parts. It's a very different skill set and deployment of energy.

sjg007 5y ago

AI researchers have so many options today. I’d be surprised if this hasn’t hurt Google’s and Deep Mind’s recruitment efforts.

caddemon 5y ago
There are also a lot of AI researchers today though. I'm not sure about higher level positions, but for current grad students and postdocs DeepMind is still a very sought after place to work.
- sjg007 5y ago
  Yes but you want the good ones.
  - caddemon 5y ago
    I mean it remains sought after in top programs. The field is oversaturated from top to bottom, I don't think they will have any issues attracting talent. Particularly not from this story - every academic department probably has at least one top professor worse than this guy.

omarhaneef 5y ago

Here is an observation, make of it what you will: These are the environments I’ve been in where it has been very common for people to scream at each other, both loudly and often: - banking - venture - consulting These are the environments where I have not seen this behavior: - academia - tech - an operating company I’ll tell you what makes it tolerable and normal versus abusive: if a subordinate is “allowed” to yell back.

meowface 5y ago
Maybe I'm just sheltered, but I've never worked at a company where I've been screamed at or have heard anyone screaming at anyone. (I have heard stories, but the stories circulated because everyone recognized how atypical, absurd, and unprofessional the behavior was.) Surely this is the norm, and screaming is the outlier?
- bsder 5y ago
  > Surely this is the norm, and screaming is the outlier? Screaming was seen as a "negotiating tactic" for quite a lot of the 1970's and 1980's in American "business". I suspect there was more screaming when you worked for one company for life because you had to defend your company position more jealously. Now, you leave and get a raise. I would also argue that it is more of a tactic outside of tech. Businesses that like to pride themselves on being "high-stress environments" probably have more of it. In addition, different parts of the world have different ideas as to what conflict in the "superior/subordinate" relationship looks like. Some expect extreme deference; others expect you to squawk.
zz865 5y ago
Honestly I wish there was more screaming and yelling. I'm tired of fake smiles and passive aggressive behavior. If you dont like what I'm doing please tell me. I'm up for a proper debate. One of the best places I worked at occasionally one guy would completely throw a tantrum - but then at the end of the day would have a few beers with the guy he was arguing with and make up. People just learned how he was. Ideally tantrums aren't the best way to do it, but some proper communication would be good.

vmception 5y ago

Just to poll the crowd, what do you prefer to happen?

mattfrommars 5y ago

Does anyone know of good resource guide to climb up the corporate ladder? Apart being absolutely good at what you do and learning to communicate, what hard "things you should be doing" takes a good software developer climb up the ladder?

rdxm 5y ago
if you want to play the management game learn how to be a sociopath.....quickly.....

nixnax 5y ago

uhh based google?

johnboi 5y ago

On no there is a muslim in the tech scene doing well. Let's exaggerate and try and kick him out.

BlissWaves 5y ago

How is he so important in AI community considering he doesn't even have a degree?

vallas 5y ago
who is he?

PaulaFox 5y ago

Hi))) My name is Paula, I'm 24 years old) Looking for a naughty man to exchange private pics 18+ If interested, my profile https://tiny.one/id670344 https://tiny.one/id670344

machinelearning 5y ago

Have to say the obvious thing: Shit like this is unacceptable. Maybe the article is a hit piece with questionable factual credibility. So this isn’t a statement about the person itself but the behavior described by the article. People in this thread seem to be confusing disagreeability and a relentless focus on achieving a goal vs being drunk with power. Both of these things may manifest a similar kind of harshness but they are very different. The kind of behavior described in this article is of someone who uses their (probably undeserved) power to protect their own position. These kinds of people should be removed from an organization as they without exception harm the organization more than they contribute to it.

stablechaos 5y ago

Seeing a link like this at the top of HackerNews is deeply disappointing. Regardless of the accusation or the status of a person, everyone deserves due diligence when it comes to attacks on people's character and reputation. A brief 200-word blurb is gossip, even if she provides links. The fact that she couldn't be bothered to write any more is indicative of how little she cares about whether her criticism is legitimate or not, whether there's important context left out, or whether the statements are supportable by concrete evidence and not just rumor. We need to take stuff like this more seriously, and not just take the words of some random gossip writer at face value.

truetraveller 5y ago
It is disappointing. More so, the general attitude of HN. This witch-hunt culture / cancel-culture has got to stop. It's far worse in my eyes than any so-called "abuse". This is abuse.

thereare5lights 5y ago

Wow, I didn't expect this to blow up nor did I expect so many people to come out so vehemently in defense of someone wielding power in such a way as to negatively affect people. It's really illuminating to see what kind of behaviors people take the effort to defend and support. I wish I could say I was surprised but I've seen people speak out in favor of hurting other people far too often.

heisenbit 5y ago

We do not know all the details. We know neither contract nor do we know what disciplinary actions and other communication happened. The title and position sounds better but it seems he lost direct disciplinary power and his closeness to the top also implies supervision from the top. Disciplinary matters are secretive and highly individual. Cases from the outside may look different from the inside. Unless there is a pattern to look the other way I’m inclined to give Google the benefit of doubt.