Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
China Businesses Google

Senior Google Scientist Resigns Over 'Forfeiture of Our Values' in China (theintercept.com) 178

A senior Google research scientist has quit the company in protest over its plan to launch a censored version of its search engine in China. The Intercept: Jack Poulson worked for Google's research and machine intelligence department, where he was focused on improving the accuracy of the company's search systems. In early August, Poulson raised concerns with his managers at Google after The Intercept revealed that the internet giant was secretly developing a Chinese search app for Android devices. The search system, code-named Dragonfly, was designed to remove content that China's authoritarian government views as sensitive, such as information about political dissidents, free speech, democracy, human rights, and peaceful protest. After entering into discussions with his bosses, Poulson decided in mid-August that he could no longer work for Google. He tendered his resignation and his last day at the company was August 31. He told The Intercept in an interview that he believes he is one of about five of the company's employees to resign over Dragonfly. He felt it was his "ethical responsibility to resign in protest of the forfeiture of our public human rights commitments," he said.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Senior Google Scientist Resigns Over 'Forfeiture of Our Values' in China

Comments Filter:
  • by jellomizer ( 103300 ) on Thursday September 13, 2018 @01:58PM (#57308450)

    I have quit jobs that I felt has turned me into a bad person, and I would look in the mirror and realized I wasn't happy with what I had became.

    Sure we all have jobs that we may not like or disagree with, but if you have a moral objection to it, you should quit your job. If you are Senior Data scientist, Google may have a harder time replacing your job. But I am sure they will find someone to fill the gap. But the thing is, we can't always change the world, but at least we can feel good about our current place in it.

    • by zlives ( 2009072 )

      "Why is this uncommon?" wage slaves. err wage workers for python users

    • by sittingnut ( 88521 ) <sittingnut.gmail@com> on Thursday September 13, 2018 @02:25PM (#57308684) Homepage

      person who resigned is virtue signaling. and covering up for google at same time, by acting as if this something new for the company
      * google has been spying on everyone to make money for years. its how they make money.
      * it has been sharing info with usa intelligence agencies.
      * it actively helped usa's interfering political agenda's in other countries, for example actively helping and making apps for syria's mostly islamic terrorist opposition to assad. now just before a major military operation( with already heated propaganda claims and counter claims about chemical weapons) google is censoring regimes's media, only regime's not opposition's.
      * conservatives and trump supporters claim they have been targeted by google through censorship, blocking, shadow banning , etc,. some have indeed been subjected to all that.
      * google companies are now actively propping up visibility of legacy media, with their bias and establishment views, allegedly to combat "fake news".

      • Re: (Score:1, Funny)

        by Anonymous Coward

        Nooo This cannot be... I have seen nothing about this on CNN :)

      • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 13, 2018 @02:43PM (#57308866)

        As much as I despise virtue signalling, this, refreshingly, is not an example of it. The employee in question chose to quit his job rather than continue on in his position. He deliberately chose personal sacrifice/inconvenience in favor of his pet issue. Whether I agree or disagree with an activist on any particular issue, I can at least show some amount of respect to a person who is willing to put their money where their mouth is.

        Virtue signalling, in contrast, is the act of shouting very loudly about an issue without actually doing anything about it. Look at me, I'm one of the Good Guys! I care soooooo deeply about Issue X! Those Bad Guys would never care as deeply as me! And so on.

        • Bravo. Well said.

        • Yeah, definitely not virtue signaling. This is virtue putting your money where your mouth is.
      • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

        by jeff4747 ( 256583 )

        * conservatives and trump supporters claim they have been targeted by google through censorship, blocking, shadow banning , etc,.

        Except that hasn't actually happened.

        But it's a fantastic excuse when you mistakenly believe you are part of a large majority, yet do not see that reflected online.

        • happy in your bubble? to live in the "don't be evil" is real, fantasy! what bliss!!
          don't forget to hug each other if the bubble bursts for a day or two due real world events, as weepy google cfo urged at tgif meeting after 2016 election.

          • I'm not the one on the inside of the bubble, I'm afraid.

            If you'd like to provide some actual evidence of what you allege, I'd be happy to read it. But evidence is not the same as "I'm not getting as many views as I used to"

            I eagerly await your next fusillade of insults insisting that evidence is everywhere yet you don't quite manage to point to any.

      • by Anonymous Coward

        Yes, Google has long shed any semblance of ever living up to it's "Don't be Evil" slogan, as if the fact they dropped that slogan wasn't sufficient evidence in itself.

        One of the most blatant hypocrisies I've seen recently is it's pissing and moaning about how the right to be forgotten is censorship, and how the European court shouldn't rule to force it to delete personal data it has obtained illegally globally from it's systems given this is currently in front of the court, and yet at the same time it's act

      • by Luckyo ( 1726890 )

        Google dropped the "don't be evil" for "be good" as a slogan a few years ago. This is very telling, because that's the fundamental difference between the system used in Soviet Union and other major dictatorships vs the system used in the West.

        Western liberal systems dictate what you SHOULD NOT do. By default, everything that isn't expressly forbidden is allowed. This curbs the tyrannical nature of trying to establish lawful order over people and enable society to function.

        "Be good" is an example of a system

        • by meglon ( 1001833 )

          Which is what we're seeing here. Conservatives do things that are not classified as "good" just by being conservatives in progressive view.

          No. If you defend the actions and ideals of NAZI"S...you are a fucking bad person, whether you are conservative or liberal. When that's done, and a forum kicks the worthless piece of shit off, that isn't because they're conservative (or liberal), it's because they're fucking NAZI sympathizers spreading hate speech. Grow a fucking brain.

          • by Luckyo ( 1726890 )

            And this is an excellent example of a religious zealot. Facts don't matter. History don't matter. Reality don't matter. All that matters is the religious dogma, and anyone who isn't espousing it is the enemy. And enemy must be labelled a heretic. Which for progressives is "nazi". Doesn't matter if the target actually committed heresy. That would be thinking in liberal terms.

            It's sufficient that opponent opposes the dogma. He's not doing good. That means he's a nazi.

            You made my point quite well for me. Thank

    • by sycodon ( 149926 )

      they will find someone to fill the gap

      H-1B from China, No Doubt!

    • He's avoiding "resume slime."

      He's young and has his whole career ahead of him.

      He can point to this moment as one that defines him as a valuable asset any where in the world.

      Hell, he may wind up in China.

      He's got the chops [linkedin.com].

      - Google
      Senior Research Scientist
      Google
      May 2016 – September 2018 2 years 5 months

      - Stanford University
      Assistant Professor Of Mathematics
      Stanford University
      November 2014 – May 2016 1 year 7 months

      - Stanford, CA
      Georgia Institute of Technology
      Assistant Professor of Computational Science and Engineering
      Georgia Institute of Technology
      November 2013 – October 2014 1 year
      Atlanta, GA

      Education

      Stanford University
      Stanford University
      Postdoctoral, Applied Mathematics
      2013 – 2013

      The University of Texas at Austin
      The University of Texas at Austin
      Doctor of Philosophy - PhD, Computational and Applied Mathematics
      2009 – 2012

    • It's uncommon because they need to wait for all their options to vest.
  • You people can imagine something like this in the Steve Jobs company? And in Microsoft or IBM? How this companies would handle this?
    • I can, for the most part I expect they would just resign for "personal reasons". These companies have their share of turnover, even in the senior positions. I am sure many had been for values.

  • by Anonymous Coward

    Google works with the NSA to spy on everyone in the US and most of the rest of the world too.

    Google is not your friend.

    It is a monster.

    For some of us this is already apparent.

  • Well, you know (Score:4, Insightful)

    by ruddk ( 5153113 ) on Thursday September 13, 2018 @02:01PM (#57308488)

    The tech world are not all that into free speech anymore, specially not those coming out of Silicon Valley. ;)

    • by SuperKendall ( 25149 ) on Thursday September 13, 2018 @02:18PM (#57308646)

      It seems pretty ripe to claim Google is forfeiting values in China, when it's applying the very same values of control over the populace in the U.S. by removing many kinds of YouTube videos it does not like, either for content or ideology.

      If you are removing content based on ideology, you have no reason to claim any moral high ground over China.

      • by PhrostyMcByte ( 589271 ) <phrosty@gmail.com> on Thursday September 13, 2018 @03:31PM (#57309208) Homepage
        Can you give some examples of videos they've removed that you believe should have been kept? I feel like I can't really give an opinion on it until I actually see the kinds of things they're removing.
        • You want to see something that no longer exists? How would they do that?

        • by Anonymous Coward

          Can you give some examples of videos they've removed that you believe should have been kept? I feel like I can't really give an opinion on it until I actually see the kinds of things they're removing.

          That's just it, you cannot see it anymore..

          Remember Diamond and Silk? They got de-monetized by U-Tube. They lost subscribers and lost income from this. Facebook even banned them but puts them back, but only after the political shit storm hits about it.

          A number of "gun videos" got deleted from U-Tube a few months ago too. Why? Not because they where advocating violence or anything sinister, but because they contained imagery of guns, some being fired at gun ranges (gasp), and even had discussions and v

        • Can you give some examples of videos they've removed ... I can't really give an opinion on it until I actually see

          I honestly assumed your post was an well-crafted work of sarcasm (which I did appreciate BTW) but equally I applaud those who actually gave a range of real responses. :-)

      • IMO, Google would have higher moral by censoring in China than it does by censoring in America.

        In China, censorship is the law. The Chinese people chose their leaders and they approved censorship law. People's representatives also decide what should be censored and they have voluntary armies of people working on censorship. They also have the legislative means (although difficult) to change that (censorship or what should be censored). That's not to say it is democratic, as the representation of minorities

        • The Chinese people chose their leaders and they approved censorship law.

          That seems wrong...

          However I agree with your overall point and sub-points otherwise. I can't fault companies for doing business respecting the laws of countries they can operate in, as you say where I have an issue is with trying to impose the will of a tiny minority over free countries.

  • This is a shocking turnaround for Google. They were so benevolent before this whole China thing.
    • by Anonymous Coward

      World isn't black and white. They could be thinking that engaging with China will change things for the better. I could picture China making some concessions to have Google do business in their country. Most changes doesn't occur overnight and it often arrive slowly. I would argue incremental changes are better since abrupt changes are result of violence or lead to violence.

  • Unfortunately, many people will be willing to take his place.
    • Unfortunately, many people will be willing to take his place.

      Yes, because is *always* because of the money or fame.

  • Wait until Google starts censoring what can be seen and said in the West to satisfy their capitalist greed for the next dollar. Maybe it is happening right now. If their Communist masters are not turning the screws on Google now, they will. Don't doubt it.
  • Do not be evil.... unless it makes lots of money. So, be evil almost always.
  • What will they do when Google has to implement similar European requirements of pre-filtering and removing "content inciting violence"? Or is that only when countries we don't like do stuff like that?

  • And that's being unprofitable in a huge country like China.
  • If I were to take a contrarian view of this, I would ask: "What is the difference between Google censoring search results based on the public security laws of China, versus Google censoring search results based on the copyright laws of the USA and EU?"

    Why didn't this researcher resign over the 2nd instance?
    • by Anonymous Coward

      You can read the wikipedia article on Nazi's in Germany, but you can't read about the Tiananmen Square protests in China.

    • Re:devil's advocate? (Score:5, Informative)

      by drinkypoo ( 153816 ) <drink@hyperlogos.org> on Thursday September 13, 2018 @02:33PM (#57308772) Homepage Journal

      If I were to take a contrarian view of this, I would ask: "What is the difference between Google censoring search results based on the public security laws of China, versus Google censoring search results based on the copyright laws of the USA and EU?"

      The difference is that in the USA it's legal to include as much of a copyrighted work as necessary for criticism or to otherwise make a point, but in China if you include information that the government doesn't want you to share, you get broken up for parts and your organs are sold to the highest bidder.

      • I hope Chinese organs are of a higher quality than their other products. Otherwise "the highest bidder" won't be bidding much.

      • in China if you include information that the government doesn't want you to share, you get broken up for parts and your organs are sold to the highest bidder.

        To continue the contrarian view, so this is a good thing? One person is sacrificed to save the lives of many and even better they let the almighty market distribute the salvation. It's a glorious combination of community and capitalism.

        • To continue the contrarian view, so this is a good thing? One person is sacrificed to save the lives of many and even better they let the almighty market distribute the salvation. It's a glorious combination of community and capitalism.

          It's a combination of community and capitalism, all right, but it's not glorious. It's tyrannical. The many do not have any freedom if the few do not have them, either.

  • Google's always had a cozy relationship with the Deep State, and has been helping the Pentagon develop software for drones used to blow up people that have never done a thing to the United States, in countries where war has not been declared. But the straw the breaks the camel's back for this guy, is giving the Chinese government a fraction of the capability enjoyed by the CIA/NSA/FBI?

    And please, nobody come in with the line that Google's code is to make drones more accurate so they kill fewer innocent bys

  • oh wait.... that doesn't apply anymore.

    Do the right thing. There... way more open to interpretation.

    Carry on.

  • Google Search is already censored worldwide: torrents, EU's "right to be forgotten", DMCA, copyright filters, etc. It's a matter of degree, not of substance. I find much more concerning whether the Chinese Government will use Google Search for surveillance.
    • Exactly. The EU now wants their "right to be forgotten" to apply worldwide. EU censorship is good. But Chinese censorship is bad,and they would howl if China insisted on worldwide application of Chinese rules.

      So: kudos to this guy, but his objections are too narrow.

  • Who to root for?

    On the one hand, China clearly does not derive from Europeans, so they must be good. OTOH, they clearly do some not so good things ...

    And Google has to be good for being on the "right" side of so many issues and "nudging" people in the progressive direction, yet here they are willing to sell their souls for money in China, which is bad ...

    Enough to make one's head hurt.

    • Your "clash of the SJW titans" seemes to be something that you've invented entirely yourself. For example:

      On the one hand, China clearly does not derive from Europeans, so they must be good.

      This seems to be a "viewpoint" held exclusively by people like you*.

      And Google has to be good for being on the "right" side of so many issues and "nudging" people in the progressive direction,

      Except eh sort of people you're whining about seem to complain an awful lot about google.

      Enough to make one's head hurt.

      Well, with

  • I don't blame the guy at all for doing that. Google once had a motto of "don't be evil", but they left that behind a long time ago in favor of "profit over all".
    Sometimes you have to lead by example and make damned sure that people know you're doing it. If enough key people leave Google then maybe they'll get the idea that the direction they're going is wrong and counterproductive in the long term.
  • For the vast majority of the human species. . . . Wealth will always trump Morals / Ethics

    Early on, Google had delusions about doing the right thing, but money corrupts everything it touches and you see where Google is today.

    Imagine where they will be tomorrow :|

  • Being a white male, possibly even straight (gasp), his career at google would have been limited anyways.

If all else fails, lower your standards.

Working...