Source Code: Your daily look at what matters in tech.

workplaceworkplaceauthorMegan Rose DickeyNoneYour guide to the new world of work.39cd4d6373
×

Get access to Protocol

Your information will be used in accordance with our Privacy Policy

I’m already a subscriber
People

'There's a chilling effect': Google's firing of leading AI ethicist spurs industry outrage

Timnit Gebru's firing could damage Google's reputation and ethical AI research within tech companies, industry leaders told Protocol.

'There's a chilling effect': Google's firing of leading AI ethicist spurs industry outrage

Timnit Gebru said that she was forced out of Google because of an email she sent to members of the Google Brain Women and Allies listserv.

Photo: Kimberly White/Getty Images

After Google fired one of the industry's most respected and well-loved AI ethics researchers on Wednesday, Google employees and tech industry leaders alike voiced their fear that her firing will have a "chilling effect" on ethics research within tech companies and at Google specifically.

Timnit Gebru, the now-former technical co-lead for Google's AI ethics team, said that she was forced out of Google because of an email she sent to members of the Google Brain Women and Allies Listserv that detailed her frustration with the company's diversity pledges and the exhausting experience of being a Black woman at Google, as well as conflict over an ethics research paper that Google wanted retracted. Over the last week, Gebru had been fighting to have the research paper — which discusses the ethics issues of large language models — published with her and other Google employees' names.

After Gebru said that she would plan to resign if Google didn't commit to further discussion about the company's demands over the research paper, Google immediately rejected her conditions and terminated her employment without discussion, according to Gebru's statement. In the email explaining her termination shared by Gebru, Google Research Vice President Megan Kacholia wrote that Gebru's email to the Listserv was "inconsistent with the expectations of a Google manager." Google declined to comment.

Gebru is best known for her research on discrimination within facial recognition models, including a groundbreaking study that illustrated gender and skin-type bias in the best commercial AI facial recognition systems at the time. "She's literally the best of the best. She's the best that we've got. Not only does Timnit encapsulate our hopes and dreams, and is the embodiment of the best of us, but she is strongly supported," said Mutale Nkonde, the CEO of AI for the People and a fellow at Harvard's Berkman Klein Center.

Gebru is also well-liked for supporting activism within Google and defending employees who've lost their jobs because of their protests. Shortly before she tweeted that she had been fired, the National Labor Relations Board filed a complaint that said Google had violated labor laws by spying on and then firing workers who were organizing employee protests. "If we have heroes in the AI ethics community, she's one of those heroes," said Susan Etlinger, an AI expert at the Altimeter Group. "She's someone who has, at great cost to herself, persisted in identifying, publicizing and trying to remediate a lot of the issues that arise with the use of intelligent technologies."

A number of people on her own team and others within Google tweeted their support for Gebru and anger with their employer. That includes Alex Hanna, a senior research scientist on the ethical AI team, who said that "to call her unbecoming of a manager is the height of disrespect." Dylan Baker, another Ethical AI team member, called her "the best manager I've had."

Gebru's departure could be damaging for Google's reputation in the ethical AI community and among tech workers broadly. The support for Gebru in the industry is nearly unanimous, and every leader who spoke to Protocol for this story echoed the same two sentiments: She is among the best at her technical work and Google's decision to fire her shocks and angers them. "The idea that this is going to be able to happen, and it's going to go away and it's not going to have an impact on tech … Google really needs to really look at itself in a mirror," Nkonde said.

All of the industry leaders who spoke with Protocol voiced their fear that her firing would have a chilling effect on other ethical researchers in the industry and at Google specifically. Academics and activists have long expressed skepticism about the integrity of ethical AI research at places like Google, but Gebru's reputation and leadership role lent credibility to Google's research and helped quell the critics. Earlier this year, Google even announced plans to launch an ethical AI consultancy that would provide tips for difficult problems learned from Google's own research and experience.

In firing her, Google not only gave up the voice that earned the ethical AI team respect in the first place, but also made it clear that there were consequences for speaking up, said Ansgar Koene, the global AI ethics and regulatory leader at EY and senior research fellow at the University of Nottingham. "Their division does great work, except a lot of the times they have their hands tied behind their backs because of such repressive policies," said Abhishek Gupta, a machine-learning engineer at Microsoft and founder of the Montreal AI Ethics Institute.

Gebru's firing was not entirely unexpected for people who knew her, including Gupta. Just the day before, while Gebru battled to get approval for the ethics research paper, Gupta and Gebru discussed how to create a legal system of protection for ethics whistleblowers inside tech companies. A few days before that, Gebru tweeted publicly that she wished there were a system of whistleblower protections.

"In a sense, this has been a long time in the making. This has, in bits and pieces, happened in the past, where she's tried to bring up relevant issues, and Google has sort of tried to suppress what she's saying," Gupta said, adding: "It's an unfortunate combination of what has been going on for months, I think."

Moving forward, people in her position need significant legal support to be able to express their concerns without fear of losing their jobs, said David Ryan Polgar, the founder and executive director of All Tech is Human. "There's a chilling effect for the people who don't have any type of national stature … You should have the ability to be a roadblock to what you would deem inappropriate activity."

And beyond the research work itself, firing Gebru makes Black women like her less likely to pursue the same career path, AI for the People's Nkonde said. "As Black women in tech, we all face similar issues, and not everybody is going to take the stand to stay within [the] industry," she said. For research scientists currently in school, choosing to work in the industry is far more intimidating after watching Gebru's experience play out, a feeling expressed by a number of those students on Twitter today.

If Gebru had decided to leave Google and announced that she would be going elsewhere, the reaction would have been celebratory, Nkonde explained. Instead, Google's decision to not only fire her but directly email the team she had managed about her departure creates a sense of fear and anger, showing that the tech sector, and Google specifically, "can be a hostile place for Black women," Nkonde said.

Ellen Pao, co-founder and CEO of Project Include and former CEO at Reddit, said that by firing Gebru, Google created an unfixable PR problem that illustrates a more systemic discrimination problem. "When I see Google in the context of its past, it has a terrible record of dealing with bias and discrimination, and it has a record of not hiring people from marginalized, underrepresented groups, not promoting them," she told Protocol.

"I think what it says is actually more important than what it says about Google. What this says is that the work of trying to remediate bias and create fairer technical systems is incredibly hard, and it's not just hard from a computational perspective. It's not just hard from a technical perspective. It's hard because it requires diversity of perspective, it requires diversity across many axes," Altimeter Group's Etlinger said.

Issie Lapowsky contributed additional reporting.

Protocol | Workplace

In Silicon Valley, it’s February 2020 all over again

"We'll reopen when it's right, but right now the world is changing too much."

Tech companies are handling the delta variant in differing ways.

Photo: alvarez/Getty Images

It's still 2021, right? Because frankly, it's starting to feel like March 2020 all over again.

Google, Apple, Uber and Lyft have now all told employees they won't have to come back to the office before October as COVID-19 case counts continue to tick back up. Facebook, Google and Uber are now requiring workers to get vaccinated before coming to the office, and Twitter — also requiring vaccines — went so far as to shut down its reopened offices on Wednesday, and put future office reopenings on hold.

Keep Reading Show less
Allison Levitsky
Allison Levitsky is a reporter at Protocol covering workplace issues in tech. She previously covered big tech companies and the tech workforce for the Silicon Valley Business Journal. Allison grew up in the Bay Area and graduated from UC Berkeley.

After a year and a half of living and working through a pandemic, it's no surprise that employees are sending out stress signals at record rates. According to a 2021 study by Indeed, 52% of employees today say they feel burnt out. Over half of employees report working longer hours, and a quarter say they're unable to unplug from work.

The continued swell of reported burnout is a concerning trend for employers everywhere. Not only does it harm mental health and well-being, but it can also impact absenteeism, employee retention and — between the drain on morale and high turnover — your company culture.

Crisis management is one thing, but how do you permanently lower the temperature so your teams can recover sustainably? Companies around the world are now taking larger steps to curb burnout, with industry leaders like LinkedIn, Hootsuite and Bumble shutting down their offices for a full week to allow all employees extra time off. The CEO of Okta, worried about burnout, asked all employees to email him their vacation plans in 2021.

Keep Reading Show less
Stella Garber
Stella Garber is Trello's Head of Marketing. Stella has led Marketing at Trello for the last seven years from early stage startup all the way through its acquisition by Atlassian in 2017 and beyond. Stella was an early champion of remote work, having led remote teams for the last decade plus.
Protocol | China

Livestreaming ecommerce next battleground for China’s nationalists

Vendors for Nike and even Chinese brands were harassed for not donating enough to Henan.

Nationalists were trolling in the comment sections of livestream sessions selling products by Li-Ning, Adidas and other brands.

Collage: Weibo, Bilibili

The No. 1 rule of sales: Don't praise your competitor's product. Rule No. 2: When you are put to a loyalty test by nationalist trolls, forget the first rule.

While China continues to respond to the catastrophic flooding that has killed 99 and displaced 1.4 million people in the central province of Henan, a large group of trolls was busy doing something else: harassing ordinary sportswear sellers on China's livestream ecommerce platforms. Why? Because they determined that the brands being sold had donated too little, or too late, to the people impacted by floods.

Keep Reading Show less
Zeyi Yang
Zeyi Yang is a reporter with Protocol | China. Previously, he worked as a reporting fellow for the digital magazine Rest of World, covering the intersection of technology and culture in China and neighboring countries. He has also contributed to the South China Morning Post, Nikkei Asia, Columbia Journalism Review, among other publications. In his spare time, Zeyi co-founded a Mandarin podcast that tells LGBTQ stories in China. He has been playing Pokemon for 14 years and has a weird favorite pick.
Power

The video game industry is bracing for its Netflix and Spotify moment

Subscription gaming promises to upend gaming. The jury's out on whether that's a good thing.

It's not clear what might fall through the cracks if most of the biggest game studios transition away from selling individual games and instead embrace a mix of free-to-play and subscription bundling.

Image: Christopher T. Fong/Protocol

Subscription services are coming for the game industry, and the shift could shake up the largest and most lucrative entertainment sector in the world. These services started as small, closed offerings typically available on only a handful of hardware platforms. Now, they're expanding to mobile phones and smart TVs, and promising to radically change the economics of how games are funded, developed and distributed.

Of the biggest companies in gaming today, Amazon, Apple, Electronic Arts, Google, Microsoft, Nintendo, Nvidia, Sony and Ubisoft all operate some form of game subscription. Far and away the most ambitious of them is Microsoft's Xbox Game Pass, featuring more than 100 games for $9.99 a month and including even brand-new titles the day they release. As of January, Game Pass had more than 18 million subscribers, and Microsoft's aggressive investment in a subscription future has become a catalyst for an industrywide reckoning on the likelihood and viability of such a model becoming standard.

Keep Reading Show less
Nick Statt
Nick Statt is Protocol's video game reporter. Prior to joining Protocol, he was news editor at The Verge covering the gaming industry, mobile apps and antitrust out of San Francisco, in addition to managing coverage of Silicon Valley tech giants and startups. He now resides in Rochester, New York, home of the garbage plate and, completely coincidentally, the World Video Game Hall of Fame. He can be reached at nstatt@protocol.com.
Protocol | Policy

Lina Khan wants to hear from you

The new FTC chair is trying to get herself, and the sometimes timid tech-regulating agency she oversees, up to speed while she still can.

Lina Khan is trying to push the FTC to corral tech companies

Photo: Graeme Jennings/AFP via Getty Images

"When you're in D.C., it's very easy to lose connection with the very real issues that people are facing," said Lina Khan, the FTC's new chair.

Khan made her debut as chair before the press on Wednesday, showing up to a media event carrying an old maroon book from the agency's library and calling herself a "huge nerd" on FTC history. She launched into explaining how much she enjoys the open commission meetings she's pioneered since taking over in June. That's especially true of the marathon public comment sessions that have wrapped up each of the two meetings so far.

Keep Reading Show less
Ben Brody

Ben Brody (@ BenBrodyDC) is a senior reporter at Protocol focusing on how Congress, courts and agencies affect the online world we live in. He formerly covered tech policy and lobbying (including antitrust, Section 230 and privacy) at Bloomberg News, where he previously reported on the influence industry, government ethics and the 2016 presidential election. Before that, Ben covered business news at CNNMoney and AdAge, and all manner of stories in and around New York. He still loves appearing on the New York news radio he grew up with.

Latest Stories