Google Employees Are Lining Up To Trash Google's AI Ethics Council (technologyreview.com)
An anonymous reader quotes a report from MIT Technology Review: Almost a thousand Google staff, academic researchers, and other tech industry figures have signed a letter protesting the makeup of an independent council that Google created to guide the ethics of its AI projects. The search giant announced the creation of the council last week at EmTech Digital, MIT Technology Review's event in San Francisco. Known as the Advanced Technology External Advisory Council (ATEAC), it has eight members including economists, philosophers, policymakers, and technologists with expertise in issues like algorithmic bias. It is meant to hold four meetings a year, starting this month, and write reports designed to provide feedback on projects at the company that use artificial intelligence.
But two of those members proved controversial. One, Dyan Gibbens, is CEO of Trumbull, a company that develops autonomous systems for the defense industry -- a contentious choice given that thousands of Google employees protested the company's decision to supply the US Air Force with AI for drone imaging. The greatest outrage, though, has come over the inclusion of Kay Coles James, president of the Heritage Foundation, a think tank that opposes regulating carbon emissions, takes a hard line on immigration, and has argued against the protection of LGBTQ rights. The creation of ATEAC -- and the inclusion of Gibbens and James -- may in fact have been designed to appease Google's right-wing critics. At roughly the same time the council was announced, Sundar Pichai, Google's CEO, was meeting with President Donald Trump. Trump later tweeted: "He stated strongly that he is totally committed to the U.S. Military, not the Chinese Military. [We] also discussed political fairness and various things that Google can do for our Country. Meeting ended very well!" "Not only are James' views counter to Google's stated values," the letter states, "but they are directly counter to the project of ensuring that the development and application of AI prioritizes justice over profit. Such a project should instead place representatives from vulnerable communities at the center of decision-making."
But two of those members proved controversial. One, Dyan Gibbens, is CEO of Trumbull, a company that develops autonomous systems for the defense industry -- a contentious choice given that thousands of Google employees protested the company's decision to supply the US Air Force with AI for drone imaging. The greatest outrage, though, has come over the inclusion of Kay Coles James, president of the Heritage Foundation, a think tank that opposes regulating carbon emissions, takes a hard line on immigration, and has argued against the protection of LGBTQ rights. The creation of ATEAC -- and the inclusion of Gibbens and James -- may in fact have been designed to appease Google's right-wing critics. At roughly the same time the council was announced, Sundar Pichai, Google's CEO, was meeting with President Donald Trump. Trump later tweeted: "He stated strongly that he is totally committed to the U.S. Military, not the Chinese Military. [We] also discussed political fairness and various things that Google can do for our Country. Meeting ended very well!" "Not only are James' views counter to Google's stated values," the letter states, "but they are directly counter to the project of ensuring that the development and application of AI prioritizes justice over profit. Such a project should instead place representatives from vulnerable communities at the center of decision-making."
"and has argued against the protection of LGBTQ rights"
No, he opposes special laws just for LGBTQ people. They shouldn't get special treatment or special laws. That's not how it works, we're all to be treated equally under the law.
Looking at the furor over simply having someone with a slightly different point of view be able to speak and take part in decision making, it appears that humans are absolutely garbage at ethics determinations and probably we should just let the AI do whatever, it'll probably end up better than us at reasonable behavior.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
You'll be branded as a racist and be fired and nothing will change.
"How DARE they include people who aren't politically aligned to the far left! They'll run amok with their wrong think, mansplaining and **insert -phobic word of the week here.** Dissenting views will not be tolerated in our AI discussions!!!"
My god, the hypocrisy is overwhelming.
The ethics of only hearing approved viewpoints and opinions.
How very fascistic of Goolag.
Why do the smart people at Google not get that violence (or the threat of it) keeps the world working as-is? They should want to keep us up with the latest AI deterrents.
I always wonder how on earth these committees are formed. Seems like every time a committee is appointed for a task like this, there is always a few conflicts-of-interest in the pool. So, how can we appoint people and screen out serious conflicts in a timely manner? When we have a committee like this, we need people that are highly educated in their respective fields, and preferably with a background or at least passing familiarity with the technical concepts involved. The pool is probably a lot smaller than we'd like to think -- and really, conflict or not, the people I'd like to see on this type of committees are people who have a track record of changing their stance when plausible and convincing evidence is presented.
C. Griffin
"Can I keep his head for a souvenir?" --Max from Sam 'N Max Freelance Police
*** BREAKING NEWS ***
Sources confirmed earlier this century Google is full of intolerant tyrannical cry babies. Stay tuned for our special report at 11.
Color me surprised. It's illegal to discriminate against people based on their political views in California so these signatories, if holding a managerial position could be putting the company at great risk of a lawsuit.
Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
This really affects the precious nazi snowflake crybaby-victim that is Nwaack, you can tell by the hysterical (political...) crybaby routine with all the exclamations, lol. Sad. Her life must suck (!!!!!)
You must be one of those constantly-offended, angry "Progressives" who thinks anyone who disagrees with them should be censored and/or beaten. Are you a member of Antifa, by chance?
Google is left, but not as left as this person is right.
http://progressquest.com/spoltog.php?name=Son+Of+Son+Of+DarkRookie
Now, now, don't forget to gas the LGBTQ folks, too. They're so convinced that they're all victims that they'd feel sad if they were left out.
By 2019, the Humans of Earth had almost entirely deformed the meaning of the word 'justice', wielding it like a weapon against anyone that disagreed with them, generally intending some measure of revenge (and often to insist on financial compensation). Often, this wasn't even personal revenge but revenge-by-proxy, insisting that others' suffering needed amelioration.
-Styopa
of working for an ad company that really wants to support Communist China?
Preventing ad blocking in a browser.
Ensuing a search engine for Communist China won't find words and terms.
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
If you don't like what the company you work for do, just leave. This is what I did with my last employer (dubious ethics). I'm not the only one who did it. Many seniors and intermediate++ left the company. Now they only have a bunch of juniors and unmotivated employees and they have many problems with projects delivery (late, buggy, ...). Since then, I'm a freelancer and I'll never go back.
Will $CURRENT_YEAR be the year of the Linux Desktop?
citation needed that LGBTQ are victims of a coverup or that the crimes they are disproportionately a victim of are largely due to rightwing homophobes, like activists claim, and not the circumstances they themselves or other nonrightwingers put them under
Actual quotes from Kay Coles James Twitter feed (did you know she was a female? I did not):
"We are committed to solutions that give Americans access to higher-quality health care. Letâ(TM)s lower premiums, increase choice, and protect people with pre-existing conditions."
"Women deserve opportunities and recognition for their valuable contributions, not rigid pay scales, inflexible jobs, & barriers to getting their foot in the door"
"Congress should pursue real reforms that put people in charge of their health care dollars & decisionsâ"while still protecting the vulnerable."
If caring about people and looking out for the well being of women is "so far right" then what the hell are you?
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Smart people can be raging bigots. There's no conflict there.
Perhaps we can see a sticking point on the definitions of the words involved, such as "justice". If there was true justice in the world Hillary would be behind bars, GWB would be behind bars, Obama would be behind bars, and in point of fact most politicians in the US would suddenly find themselves incarcerated, too. (And there might not be a living lawyer to be found anywhere despite some of them being fine people. "Justice" warriors would end 'em all and let whatever sort them out.)
{^_^}
This is called satire you simpleton. I don't expect someone like you to understand it, it was meant for those with critical thinking abilities.
You DO know that Google is a for-profit corporation and not a student's YouTube channel, right?
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.