2 ms·
So the most “notable” AI scientists on this list have clear corporate conflicts. Some are more subtle: > Geoffrey Hinton: Emeritus Professor of Computer Scienc
by haldujai 3y ago
So the most “notable” AI scientists on this list have clear corporate conflicts. Some are more subtle:
> Geoffrey Hinton: Emeritus Professor of Computer Science, University of Toronto,
He’s affiliated with Vector (as well as some of the other Canadians on this list) and was at Google until very recently (unsure if he retained equity which would require disclosure in academia).
Hence my interest in disclosures as the conflicts are not always obvious.
- chefandy 3y agoOk, that's a person! How is saying that they should have disclosed a conflict that they did not disclose not accusatory? If that's the case, the accusation is entirely justified and should be surfaced! The other signatories would certainly want to know if they were signing in good faith when others weren't. This is what I need interns for.
- haldujai 3y agoI think you’re misunderstanding my point. I never said “they should have disclosed a conflict they did not disclose.” Disclosures are absent from this initiative, some signatories have self-identified their affiliation by their own volition and even for those it is not in the context of a conflict disclosure. There is no “signatories have no relevant disclosures” statement for those who did not for the omission to be malfeasance and pointing out the absence of a disclosure statement is not accusatory of the individuals, rather that the initiative is not transparent about potential conflicts. Once again, it is standard practice in academia to make a disclosure statement if lecturing or publishing. While it is not mandatory for initiatives calling for regulation it would be nice to have.