News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Google DeepMind. Parent comment

Re:Google DeepMind by caminante on Thursday April 20, 2023 @02:04PM (#35643801)
You worked there and didn't know of any of the intra-company autonomy infighting that leaked into the news? [0] [1]

[0] https://techcrunch.com/2023/04/20/google-consolidates-ai-res...

[1]https://www.wsj.com/articles/google-unit-deepmind-triedand-f...

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Google DeepMind by sangnoir on Thursday April 20, 2023 @02:15PM (#35643944)
If you've worked at a large organization, you'd know the news can paint a cartoonishly distorted picture largely informed by the perspective of the anonymous sources, journalist and news organization.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Google DeepMind by caminante on Thursday April 20, 2023 @02:33PM (#35644212)
The WSJ article expressly considers that factor and goes into detail on what's under the surface.

> The end of the long-running negotiations, which hasn’t previously been reported, is the latest example of how Google and other tech giants are trying to strengthen their control over the study and advancement of artificial intelligence.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Google DeepMind by f5e4 on Thursday April 20, 2023 @02:17PM (#35643988)
Could you provide a quote from either of these articles that supports the statement being questioned:

> Demis now has a load of people reporting to him who previously were rooting for his failure

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Google DeepMind by caminante on Thursday April 20, 2023 @02:40PM (#35644325)
Yes.

Further, I don't understand how explicit examples of company infighting over autonomy doesn't already address your point.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Google DeepMind by f5e4 on Thursday April 20, 2023 @02:56PM (#35644546)
Fighting between Deepmind and Google leadership over autonomy doesn't really directly support that Google Brain employees and Deepmind had infighting. They seem to me to be quite different things.

It seems like a big leap to take these articles as support the statement:

> Demis now has a load of people reporting to him who previously were rooting for his failure

It certainly might be true, but I'm missing the connection between these articles and the statement.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Google DeepMind by caminante on Thursday April 20, 2023 @03:17PM (#35644830)
> They seem to me to be quite different things.

Only if you use vague standards like

-"doesn't really directly support"

-"Google Brain employees"

How are "Google Brain employees" distinct from "Google leadership with Google Brain personnel in their respective reporting line?" What is the criteria for that distinction?

[ Parent | on HN ]