New York Times:
The company’s relationship with the Defense Department since it won a share of the contract for the Maven program, which uses artificial intelligence to interpret video images and could be used to improve the targeting of drone strikes, has touched off an existential crisis, according to emails and documents reviewed by The Times as well as interviews with about a dozen current and former Google employees.
And:
Executives at DeepMind, an A.I. pioneer based in London that Google acquired in 2014, have said they are completely opposed to military and surveillance work, and employees at the lab have protested the contract. The acquisition agreement between the two companies said DeepMind technology would never be used for military or surveillance purposes.
About a dozen Google employees have resigned over the issue, which was first reported by Gizmodo. One departing engineer petitioned to rename a conference room after Clara Immerwahr, a German chemist who killed herself in 1915 after protesting the use of science in warfare. And “Do the Right Thing” stickers have appeared in Google’s New York City offices, according to company emails viewed by The Times.
And:
Dr. Li said in the email that the final decision would be made by her boss, Diane Greene, the chief executive of Google Cloud. But Dr. Li thought the company should publicize its share of the Maven contract as “a big win for GCP,” Google Cloud Platform.
This is clearly a contentious, divisive topic. Google is a business, has obligations to shareholders, and is watching competitors like Microsoft and Amazon reap the rewards of lucrative Pentagon contracts. Not an easy thing for a business to say no to.
The internal debate over Maven, viewed by both supporters and opponents as opening the door to much bigger defense contracts, generated a petition signed by about 4,000 employees who demanded “a clear policy stating that neither Google nor its contractors will ever build warfare technology.”
Polarizing.
google == evil
If Google parent Alphabet gave a crap about shareholders, they’d let them have voting rights, but Page, Brin, and Schmidt (presumably) short that down.
https://www.recode.net/2017/6/13/15788892/alphabet-shareholder-proposals-fair-shares-counted-equally-no-supervote
Google is controlled by the “holy trinity”, not some mass of shareholders, and they are solely responsible for Google’s continued military work. Also of interest: Schmidt is Chairman of the White House Defense Innovation Advisory Board. That advice, I would imagine, would include using AI to analyze drone footage.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defense_Innovation_Advisory_Board
This is not a difficult thing to say no to, for individuals. Corporations are groups of individuals and they have the right to say no and make it a collective decision.
I have personally abstained from working with military and defense companies while my coworkers took those contracts and became rich. I’m very poor today, but at least I don’t have blood on my hands.
Don’t be evil.
Easy money for predators. How often are such acquisition agreements reneged upon at this level?
I can’t say that I’m surprised.
It shouldn’t be polarizing at all: Don’t give autonomous machines the ability to kill. Anyone who participates in this is a war criminal and probably a traitor to Humanity, should be tried and hung.
Yes. This is laughable coming from a company that harvests SSNs of third graders and blacklists entire categories of individuals.