zlacker

Why do you think so? Do you have a source of any of her supervisors saying that?

>>xyzzyz+(OP)
Not sure why the burden of proof would be higher for this claim than the preceding one.

>>jakela+Q4
Before I left Google, I looked her up, and none of her ladder, none of her supervisors, none of the other reportees of her immediate supervisor etc. had anything to do with AI ethics. She was originally hired as a Program Manager on Google Docs. In this light, I view your statement as requiring some backing.

>>xyzzyz+N5
So provide some evidence. I could easily say I worked for XYZ and say the same thing you have.

I worked for the White House as Press Secretary and got an email from Trump drunkenly claiming he ran someone over.

I worked as senior advisor to the Shadow Health Secretary in 2020 and helped leak internal communiques covering numerous malpractice suites.

Blah blah blah. It's all words until you show evidence. It's hypocritical to demand evidence from someone else without showing your own. If you don't have any to show, then that's your problem, not theirs.

>>xyzzyz+(OP)
My source is the same document that the other poster mentioned.

When did you leave? Because you know, people switch jobs, and her role at Google at the time of leaving was leading the Open Research Institute, which you might imagine has nothing to do with drive.

But no I'm not going to share confidential information just because you don't believe me.

>>joshua+28
The "Open Research Institute" is a one-person affair that she created on her own. You can put anything you want in your job title in Moma, you know. That's why I was talking about everyone else in her ladder and team.

>>xyzzyz+Gi
Right, and she's reported to the same person for a while now, who has nothing to do with drive.

>>joshua+Hj
And what is that person responsible for? Is it AI ethics?