A group of Google employees are trying to remove a member of a newly-formed AI ethics board because her opinions do not match theirs. ...
A group of Google employees are trying to remove a member of a newly-formed AI ethics board because her opinions do not match theirs.
Kay Coles James, president of conservative think-tank Heritage Foundation, was brought on-board last week by Google to provide a different viewpoint to that of Google's left-wing staff.
The board, called the Advanced Technology External Advisory Council (ATEAC), consists of experienced industry experts who work in the field of artificial intelligence research.
Ms Coles is now at risk of being exiled from her latest post by the protest-prone employees.
Activists have lashed out at Ms Cole, who was selected by the search giant for her role so the council could offer a range of backgrounds and experience, saying she is 'anti-trans, anti-LGBTQ and anti-immigrant'.
Kay Coles James, pictured here with President Donald Tump (right) is the president of the conservative think-tank Heritage Foundation and was selected to its advisory panel made up of external experts despite her views contradicting those of Google's
The protesters say in the open petition: 'In selecting James, Google is making clear that its version of 'ethics' values proximity to power over the wellbeing of trans people, other LGBTQ people and immigrants.'
Google staffers are known for their willingness to protest, with employees previously voicing discontent at a range of the firm's endeavours.
Google bosses are known to cave in to the demands of its staff, with it deciding not to renew a contract with the US military in June 2018 when the staff again protested.
The group lobbying for her dismissal accepts that Ms James was brought on board to offer a diverse range of viewpoints and balance out Google's well-known left-wing viewpoint.
Outlandish claims from the campaigners, who call themselves 'Googlers Against Transfobia', include the possibility her conservative opinions could build discrimination into super-smart machines.
Neither Google nor the Heritage Foundation immediately responded to requests for comment.
Petition backers said it launched with 580 signatures from academics, Google employees and others, including technology industry peers.
It currently sits at 1,098 Googlers who have signed the petition.
Google set up the external AI ethics council to guide the tech giant away from morally questionable uses of its technology and encroaching on the privacy of its customers.
It is intended to advise the search giant on matters relating to the development and application of its artificial intelligence research.
Google has been embroiled in past controversies regarding the use of its AI, as well as the way it protects the data it gathers.
Criticism of Ms James includes her history of being 'vocally anti-trans, anti-LGBTQ and anti-immigrant'. Comments include a recent tweet, which read: 'If they can change the definition of women to include men, they can erase efforts to empower women economically, socially, and politically'
It established an internal AI ethics board in 2014 when it acquired DeepMind but this has been shrouded in secrecy with no details ever released about who it includes.
The firm is a world-leader in many aspects of AI and the eight people recruited for the advisory board will 'consider some of Google's most complex challenges'.
Members of the board include Joanna Bryson, an associate professor at the University of Bath and William Joseph Burns, former US deputy secretary of state.
The controversy over hwo is included on the board comes as the world grapples with balancing potential benefits of artificial intelligence with risks its could be used against people or even, if given a mind of its own, turn on its creators.
Google chief Sundar Pichai said in a published interview late last year that fears about artificial intelligence are valid but that the tech industry is up to the challenge of regulating itself.
Tech companies building AI should factor in ethics early in the process to make certain artificial intelligence with 'agency of its own' doesn't hurt people, Mr Pichai said in an interview with The Washington Post.
Google chief Sundar Pichai says that fears about artificial intelligence are valid but that the tech industry is up to the challenge of regulating itself. The AI ethics board was specially curated to steer the Mountain View-based firm away from any controversies by ensuring it fully considers morality while developing its artificial intelligence (file photo)
The California-based internet giant is a leader in the development of AI, competing in the smart software race with giants such as Amazon, Apple, Facebook, IBM and Microsoft.
Last year, Google published a set of internal AI principles, the first being that AI should be socially beneficial.
Google vowed not to design or deploy AI for use in weapons, surveillance outside of international norms or in technology aimed at violating human rights.
The company noted that it would continue to work with the military or governments in areas such as cybersecurity, training, recruitment, health care and search-and-rescue.
AI is already used to recognize people in photos, filter unwanted content from online platforms and enable cars to drive themselves.
Typical libtards, refusing to acknowledge science lest it intrude on their fantasy world. People born with XY chromosomes don't change that fact OR the rest of their physical structure regardless of what they do to their genitalia. We shouldn't force people to enable the delusions of other's.
ReplyDeleteThey are mentally and spiritually confused. They want others to "accept" them when they cannot accept themselves. Others need to accept and embrace their delusion ? To also live in a delusion so that by doing so it helps them to seem "normal' ? They want "rights" made for a non existent 'thing' and they have to make up words to go along with it so laws have to be made to accommodate this perversion. God has given them over to their own lusts , Romans 1:24. Unfortunately the suicide rate is only 20% higher than NORMAL people that attempt suicide. Hopefully it will go up. What NORMAL human being would want an operation on their most private area , much lest REMOVED and CHANGED. Anyone that accepts these abominations are just as wicked as the ones in the delusion.
ReplyDelete