Jane: The reputational risks aren't as clear cut as you let on. Remember that 40% of Americans still support Trump. Google also needs to keep in minds this broader landscape of opinion, including its customers, not just those of liberal elites in the Bay Area.
-
Show this thread
-
Jane (cont'd): Even re: liberals, I have yet to hear of any mass exodus from Google, and doubt one is forthcoming because of one project.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 likeShow this thread -
Jill: It's hard to quantify the reputational risk issue, but I suspect it's serious. Scientists/engineers in general and AI researchers in particular are in a sellers' labor market and don't have to stay at Google indefinitely. They can get free food and GPUs elsewhere.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 likeShow this thread -
Jane: Let's agree to disagree on that. In any case, this whole reputation issue is just a matter of Google's self-interest, whereas what we should really be talking about is the ethics of it.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likesShow this thread -
Jane (cont'd): The wisdom of US policy (or lack thereof) doesn't mean there aren't threats to soldiers and citizens which we can help with. And Google has talent that other prospective contractors don't, as well as a responsibility to a country that has done much for its success.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likesShow this thread -
Jill: I'm not so sure. Aren't they just applying Tensorflow and off the shelf CV techniques? Maybe if Google were more open about all this, we'd be in a better position to say. I also want to push back a bit on your America-centric perspective.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likesShow this thread -
Jill (cont'd): Google may be based in the US but has offices and customers globally. It should not be picking sides.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 likeShow this thread -
Jane: As we both agree, there is no option of total neutrality. ISIS and others will continue to use Google tools, as will the US. And let's not forget that ISIS isn't the only subject here...
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likesShow this thread -
Jane (cont'd): In a world of resurgent great power conflict and trade wars, Google needs to consider the alternative: not US pacifism but the US being outmatched in future prospective conflicts by countries that work more closely with their technical talent.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likesShow this thread -
Jill: Either Google is just another company at the whims of world events, or it's a serious stakeholder with some influence over how global affairs play out - with some of those possibilities being more peaceful than others. You can't have it both ways.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likesShow this thread
If Google wants indeed a seat at the table where US geopolitics are decided, it cannot do so publicly, and probably not via democratic votes of its employees. It is even questionable if we should want corporations to make such decisions at all.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.