Contact Me By Email

Saturday, December 05, 2020

The controversy behind a star Google AI researcher’s departure

The controversy behind a star Google AI researcher’s departure

Timnit Gebru says she was pushed out of the company; now some are worried it will have a chilling effect on academics in tech.

Timnit Gebru, a former co-leader of Google’s Ethical AI team, is a leading researcher on biases baked into AI systems
Kimberly White/Getty Images for TechCrunch

Google’s workplace culture is yet again embroiled in controversy.

AI ethics researcher Timnit Gebru — a well-respected pioneer in her field and one of the few Black women leaders in the industry — said earlier this week that Google fired her after blocking the publication of her research around bias in AI systems. Days before Gebru’s departure, she sent a scathing internal memo to her colleagues detailing how higher-ups at Google tried to squash her research. She also criticized her department for what she described as a continued lack of diversity among its staff.

In her widely read internal email, which was published by Platformer, Gebru said the company was “silencing in the most fundamental way possible” and claimed that “your life gets worse when you start advocating for underrepresented people” at Google.

After Gebru’s departure, Google’s head of AI research Jeff Dean sent a note to Gebru’s department on Thursday morning saying that, after internal review, her research paper did not meet the company’s standards for publishing. According to Gebru, the company also told her that her critical note to her coworkers was “inconsistent with the expectations of a Google manager.”

A representative for Google declined to comment. Gebru did not respond to a request for comment.

Gebru’s allegation of being pushed out of the powerful tech company under questionable circumstances is causing a stir in the tech and academic communities, with many prominent researchers, civil rights leaders, and Gebru’s Google AI colleagues speaking out publicly on Twitter in her defense. A petition to support her has already received signatures from more than 740 Google employees and over 1,000 academics, nonprofit leaders, and industry peers. Her departure is significant because it hits on broader tensions around racial diversity in Silicon Valley as well as whether or not academics have enough freedom to publish research, even if it’s controversial, while working at major companies that control the development of powerful technologies and have their own corporate interests to consider.

Do you work at Google and want to talk? Please email Shirin Ghaffary at shirin.ghaffary@protonmail.com to reach her confidentially. Signal number available upon request.

What led to Gebru’s departure

People are still trying to unravel exactly what led to Gebru’s departure from Google. 

What we know is that Gebru and several of her colleagues were planning to present a research paper at a forthcoming academic conference about unintended consequences in natural language processing systems, which are the tools used in the field of computing to understand and automate the creation of written words and audio. Gebru and her colleagues’ research, according to the New York Times, “pinpointed flaws in a new breed of language technology, including a system built by Google that underpins the company’s search engine.” It also reportedly discussed the environmental consequences of large-scale computing systems used to power natural language processing programs.

As part of Google’s process, Gebru submitted the paper to Google for internal review before it was published more broadly. Google determined that the paper was not up to its standards because it “ignored too much relevant research,” according to the memo Dean sent on Thursday. 

Dean also said in his memo that Google rejected Gebru’s paper for publication because she submitted it one day before its deadline for publication instead of the required two weeks.

Gebru asked for further discussion with Google before retracting the paper, according to the Times. If Google couldn’t address her concerns, Gebru said she would resign from the company.

Google told Gebru it couldn’t meet her conditions and the company was accepting her resignation immediately.

It’s a standard process for a company like Google to review the research of its employees before it’s published outside it. But former colleagues and outside industry researchers defending Gebru questioned whether or not Google was arbitrarily enforcing its rules more strictly in this scenario.

“It just seems odd that someone who has had books written about her, who is quoted and cited on a daily basis, would be let go because a paper wasn’t reviewed properly,” said Rumman Chowdhury, a data scientist who is the former head of Responsible AI at Accenture Applied Intelligence and has now launched her own company called Parity. Chowdhury has no affiliation with Google.

The conflict and Gebru’s firing/resignation reflect a growing tension between researchers studying the ethics of AI and the major tech companies that employ them. 

It’s also another example of deep, ongoing issues dividing parts of Google’s workforce. On Wednesday, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) issued a complaint that said Google had spied on its workers and likely violated labor laws when it fired two employee activists last year. 

After several years of turmoil in Google’s workforce over issues ranging from Google’s controversial plans to work with the US military to sexual harassment of its employees, the past several months had been relatively quiet. The company’s biggest public pressure came instead from antitrust legal scrutiny and Republican lawmakers’ unproven accusations that Google’s products display an anti-conservative bias. But Gebru’s case and the recent NLRB complaint show the company is still fighting internal battles. 

“What Timnit did was present some hard but important evaluations of how the company’s efforts are going with diversity and inclusion initiatives and how to course-correct on that,” said Laurence Berland, a former Google engineer who was fired after organizing his colleagues around worker issues and one of the employees contesting his dismissal with the NLRB. “It was passionate, but it wasn’t just non-constructive,” he said.

Why Gebru’s departure matters 

In the relatively new and developing field of ethical AI, Gebru is not only a foundational researcher but a role model to many young academics. She’s also a leader of key groups like Black in AI, which are fostering more diversity in the largely white, male-dominated field of AI in the US. 

(While Google doesn’t break out its demographics specifically for its artificial intelligence research department, it does annually share its diversity numbers. Only 24.7 percent of its technical workforce are women, and 2.4 percent are Black, according to its 2020 Diversity & Inclusion report.) 

“Timnit is a pioneer. She is one of the founders of responsible and ethical artificial intelligence,” said Chowdhury. “Computer scientists and engineers enter the field because of her.”

In 2018, Gebru and another researcher, Joy Buolamwini, published groundbreaking research showing facial recognition software identified darker-skinned people and women incorrectly at far higher rates than lighter-skinned people and men. 

Her work has contributed to a broader reckoning in the tech industry about the unintended consequences of AI that is trained on data sets that can marginalize minorities and women, reinforcing existing societal inequalities.

Outside of Google, academics in the field of AI are concerned that Gebru’s firing could scare other researchers from publishing important research that may step on the toes of their employers.

“It’s not clear to researchers how they’re going to continue doing this work in the industry,” said UC Berkeley computer science professor Moritz Hardt, who specializes in machine learning and has studied fairness in AI. “It’s a chilling moment, I would say.”

The controversy behind a star Google AI researcher’s departure

Sunday, November 22, 2020

Apple Silicon M1 Mac Mini Initial Impressions! IT'S FOR REAL!

iOS 14: Apple Confirms Facebook Blow With Bold New iPhone Privacy Feature Apple has just dealt a major blow to Facebook after confirming a long-awaited privacy feature is definitely coming in 2021.


iOS 14: Apple Confirms Facebook Blow With Bold New iPhone Privacy Feature

Apple has just dealt a major blow to Facebook after confirming a long-awaited privacy feature is definitely coming in 2021.






“Apple’s iOS 14 has seen a serious boost to iPhone privacy and security, but so far it’s been missing one of its most important features. After major pushback from Facebook and others last year, Apple chose to delay the roll out of an anti-tracking feature which many said would signal the end of the so called IDFA (identifier for advertisers).

The new privacy feature, called App Tracking Transparency (ATT) makes all tracking across apps and websites opt-in only. 

Many privacy conscious iPhone users—including myself—were disappointed and with no new date for the roll out of the new privacy feature, it wasn’t clear when, or if it would happen. But now, Apple has confirmed that this brilliant anti-tracking feature will definitely be coming in 2021. 

Confirmation that Apple’s long-awaited iPhone privacy feature will be coming soon came via a letter to disappointed civil rights groups, who had complained about the delay, Apple Insider reports. 

Apple's senior director of global privacy, Jane C. Horvath, wrote that the iPhone maker delayed the release of ATT to early next year “to give developers the time they indicated they needed to properly update their systems and data practices,” but added that “we remain fully committed to ATT and to our expansive approach to privacy protections.”

The letter also stated that Apple is not against advertising; it just wants tracking to be transparent and under iPhone users’ control.

What Apple’s iOS 14 anti-tracking features mean for you

Jake Moore, cybersecurity specialist at ESET, praises the move to bring the new tracking features to Apple’s users but he warns that there could be consequences. “Once enough people learn to avert tracking, these sites will require different measures to learn about their users.”

But he says Apple’s move to stop invasive tracking practices will be positive overall—and could change the market for the better: “It is possible to advertise in a world where sites and apps do not track our every move. Sites these days can still know a great deal about us without crossing a line into being invasive, but this line needs to be formed. Intrusive tracking is a grey area but when Apple decides to lead the pack, others tend to follow suit.”

If you can’t wait for the new feature, you can also limit iPhone tracking in a few simple steps by switching off the Allow Apps to Request to Track feature. 

Apple’s iOS 14 comes with a bunch of new privacy and security features, including an orange or green dot on your iPhone when an app is using the camera or mic. A privacy nutrition label will arrive early December. 

As a user and security journalist, I think Apple’s doing a great job of security and privacy—the iPhone is one of the most secure devices out there. I’m certainly looking forward to seeing the new Apple anti-tracking feature, whenever it arrives. Let’s hope it’s soon in 2021, rather than later.“

Friday, November 20, 2020

The MacBook Air is once again the benchmark by which other laptops will be measured


"

The MacBook Air is once again the benchmark by which other laptops will be measured

The new MacBook Air is fastPhoto by Vjeran Pavic / The Verge

Last week I wrote that Apple seemed “astonishingly confident” in its new M1-based Macs. This week we know why: they are astonishingly good. I reviewed the MacBook Air, Nilay Patel reviewed the entry-level 13-inch MacBook Pro, and Chris Welch reviewed the new Mac mini

All three are equally impressive, but it’s the Air in particular that stands out as offering incredible power at its price point. I’m also impressed with battery life. And the fact that Apple’s Rosetta 2 translation layer doesn’t cause slowdown or bugs for legacy apps. 

Wins all around, then. Not very often that happens in consumer tech! The webcams are still terrible and there are lots of questions about what will happen with the truly pro Macs we will start seeing in the next couple of years. But rather than constantly look ahead to the next thing, just for a moment, enjoy: a tech company made a big promise that it could do a hard thing and then did that thing.

You are reading Processor, a newsletter about computers, software, and tech by Dieter Bohn. Dieter writes about consumer tech, software, and the most important tech news of the day from The Verge. This newsletter will arrive about once or twice a week. You can read an archive of Processor newsletters hereProcessor is also a YouTube series with the same goal: providing smart and surprising analysis with a bit of humor. Subscribe to all of The Verge’s great videos here!

By subscribing, you are agreeing to receive a daily newsletter from The Verge that highlights top stories of the day, as well as occasional messages from sponsors and / or partners of The Verge.

Okay, moment’s over. Sorry. I want to pay a little more attention to one point Chaim Gartenberg made when writing about the importance of these computers:

The most exciting — or frightening, if you’re a traditional PC chip company — part of Apple’s new chips is that the M1 is just the starting point. It’s Apple’s first-generation processor, designed to replace the chips in Apple’s weakest, cheapest laptops and desktops. Imagine what Apple’s laptops might do if the company can replicate that success on its high-end laptops and desktops or after a few more years of maturation for the M-series lineup.

It’s not difficult to divine the future of Intel and even Qualcomm’s roadmap — they are consistent (and consistently dull) in their year-over-year improvements. Their customers are phone and laptop makers, so they need to be clear and transparent about what’s up. And I don’t see either pulling a step change like the M1 out of a hat. 

By contrast, we really have no idea what Apple’s chip roadmap looks like. We can make educated guesses based on what we would expect from the current chip and Apple’s philosophy. 

We do know, however, that Apple is remarkably stable in its Mac product lineup. It doesn’t introduce a ton of different models. Different people could count differently, but I think there are eight distinct Macs that Apple sells: the Air, the entry level 13-inch MacBook Pro, the 13-inch MacBook Pro, the 16-inch MacBook Pro, the Mac mini, the iMac (two sizes on this one), the iMac Pro, and the Mac Pro.

I’m listing them all out to make a point: if you’re familiar with Macs, you have a sort of inherent idea of what those computers are, relative to each other. That’s the other way we can perhaps predict what’s next for Apple silicon. For example, we know how much more powerful an iMac is than an Air, on a rough basis. But now with the Air, the baseline for that rough basis has just been radically improved. So if the Apple silicon-based iMac continues to be as big a leap over the M1-based MacBook Air as it has been in the past, look out. 

But even if that doesn’t happen, PC makers have a problem today. So let’s come back to right now. Apple has a thousand-dollar laptop that beats the pants off anything else in its price class, and so every Windows ultrabook is going to be compared to it for the foreseeable future — and may likely be found wanting. 

We have a running joke at The Verge that our old colleague Joanna Stern (now at the WSJ) would end every Windows laptop review with “for a hundred dollars more, you could get a MacBook Air.” For the next year or two, we all might be ending reviews of thin and light Windows laptops with something like “for the same price, you can get a MacBook Air that’s faster, lasts longer on a battery, and doesn’t have a fan.”

Do Intel, Qualcomm, AMD, Microsoft, Dell, HP, Asus, Razer, or anybody else in the PC ecosystem have something that will start chopping clauses from that sentence? 


A brief programming note — I’m taking the next week off and may allow myself to be a a little intermittent in sending newsletters in December. I appreciate you all reading and hope you are staying safe this Thanksgiving holiday — and always."


The MacBook Air is once again the benchmark by which other laptops will be measured