> Members of the team told Platformer they believed they were let go because Microsoft had become more focused on getting its AI products shipped before the competition, and was less concerned with long-term, socially responsible thinking.
It might have just been a failed department and the layoffs might have given cover to purge it ahead of pursuing a more functional strategy.
Now, I can see them as a volunteer advisory group. That I'm for. But I loathe seeing all kinds of "industries" pop up that are essentially leaching from businesses. Most "training" kinds of curricula and outside experts take this form, from safety training, to AI ethics to social responsibility, etc., etc. They are there to line their own pockets and the longer they can prolong the issue the better. Oh, safety has not improved, you need to hire me again! Oh, you can't hire enough women, you need to hire me again!
"Ethics guys" insist of fixing stuff when it's broken according to their standards, even if I don't want/need them to.
I admit some of these may be difficult to accomplish with training protocol, but often these firms that come in and advise on how to be "safer" are just pounding harder. You know what, making someone glaze over a checklist isn't going to make them be safer. It takes the right personality and attention to detail that some people just lack.
Checklists have been proven to improve safety in many environments. They aren't a panacea and some workers will inevitably ignore them, but they do help.
You could re-design warehouses. Add sensors so that proximity activates a power kill switch, etc. But this is not the main thrust. The main one is most of these expert advisors are closer to extortionists than problem solvers.
I will believe them and take them seriously when they volunteer their commitment to improve things. People go to those time management trainings and the same wasteful meetings continue but with some added nonsense twist. Harassments training but managers still can't keep their hands to themselves. SOX and people still misappropriate funds. Group collaborations with some idiotic legos exercise and people still protect their silos.
[I don't know if there's something about HN or how people are using it, but these typos that make sentences have the opposite meaning seem far more frequent here than what I'd expect. I probably am biased towards noticing.]
I really, really have got to stop coming here.
> Oh, you can't hire enough women, you need to hire me again!
There it is. You didn't need to blow the dog whistle, we all got it. Keep on keepin' on ignoring the ever present boys' club and widespread reports that diversified teams produce better results. Surely that's relevant to a discussion about... an internal AI ethics team. Yup.
The amazing thing with these results is that you should thus not have the need to create any rules and regulation to impose diversity !
Companies that read and don't ignore these reports should automatically gain a competitive advantage by applying their teaching and creating diversified teams that will produce better results, and beat their backwards thinking competitors.
What is closer to the truth is what the ex-chief of diversity at Apple said once, that got her fired when she pretty naturally, and I would say, uncontroversially said: "There can be 12 white, blue-eyed, blond men in a room and they’re going to be diverse too because they’re going to bring a different life experience and life perspective to the conversation,” the inaugural diversity chief said.
“Diversity is the human experience,” she said, according to Quartz. “I get a little bit frustrated when diversity or the term diversity is tagged to the people of color, or the women, or the LGBT.”"
Distilled, the diversity that gives you an edge is the diversity in thought, not the the diversity in outward appearance.