5 ms·

You worked there and didn't know of any of the intra-company autonomy infighting that leaked into the news? [0] [1] [0] https://techcrunch.com/2023/04/20/googl

You worked there and didn't know of any of the intra-company autonomy infighting that leaked into the news? [0] [1] [0] https://techcrunch.com/2023/04/20/google-consolidates-ai-research-divisions-into-google-deepmind/ https://techcrunch.com/2023/04/20/google-consolidates-ai-res... [1]https://www.wsj.com/articles/google-unit-deepmind-triedand-failedto-win-ai-autonomy-from-parent-11621592951 https://www.wsj.com/articles/google-unit-deepmind-triedand-f...

sangnoir 4y ago
If you've worked at a large organization, you'll know the news can paint a cartoonishly distorted picture largely informed by the perspective of the anonymous sources, journalist and news organization.
- caminante 4y ago
  The WSJ article expressly considers that factor and goes into detail on what's under the surface. > The end of the long-running negotiations, which hasn’t previously been reported, is the latest example of how Google and other tech giants are trying to strengthen their control over the study and advancement of artificial intelligence.
f5e4 4y ago
Could you provide a quote from either of these articles that supports the statement being questioned: > Demis now has a load of people reporting to him who previously were rooting for his failure
- caminante 4y ago
  Yes. Further, I don't understand how explicit examples of company infighting over autonomy doesn't already address your point.
  - f5e4 4y ago
    Fighting between Deepmind and Google leadership over autonomy doesn't really directly support that Google Brain employees and Deepmind had infighting. They seem to me to be quite different things. It seems like a big leap to take these articles as support the statement: > Demis now has a load of people reporting to him who previously were rooting for his failure It certainly might be true, but I'm missing the connection between these articles and the statement.
    - caminante 4y ago
      > They seem to me to be quite different things. Only if you use vague standards like -"doesn't really directly support" -"Google Brain employees" How are "Google Brain employees" distinct from "Google leadership with Google Brain personnel in their respective reporting line?" What is the criteria for that distinction?

sangnoir 4y ago

If you've worked at a large organization, you'll know the news can paint a cartoonishly distorted picture largely informed by the perspective of the anonymous sources, journalist and news organization.

caminante 4y ago
The WSJ article expressly considers that factor and goes into detail on what's under the surface. > The end of the long-running negotiations, which hasn’t previously been reported, is the latest example of how Google and other tech giants are trying to strengthen their control over the study and advancement of artificial intelligence.

f5e4 4y ago

Could you provide a quote from either of these articles that supports the statement being questioned: > Demis now has a load of people reporting to him who previously were rooting for his failure

caminante 4y ago
Yes. Further, I don't understand how explicit examples of company infighting over autonomy doesn't already address your point.
- f5e4 4y ago
  Fighting between Deepmind and Google leadership over autonomy doesn't really directly support that Google Brain employees and Deepmind had infighting. They seem to me to be quite different things. It seems like a big leap to take these articles as support the statement: > Demis now has a load of people reporting to him who previously were rooting for his failure It certainly might be true, but I'm missing the connection between these articles and the statement.
  - caminante 4y ago
    > They seem to me to be quite different things. Only if you use vague standards like -"doesn't really directly support" -"Google Brain employees" How are "Google Brain employees" distinct from "Google leadership with Google Brain personnel in their respective reporting line?" What is the criteria for that distinction?