Google and Its Engineering Residency: Problem Solved or Is It?
June 24, 2021
I read “Google Drops Engineering Residency after Protests over Inequities.” That means unfair, right? Maybe discriminatory? Nope, more of the good old Google management method in action. Remarkable, but the Google is consistent. Controversy and glitches every which way but loose.
The write up states:
The Google residency, often referred to as “Eng Res,” has since 2014 given graduates from hundreds of schools a chance to work on different teams, receive training and prove themselves for a permanent job over the course of a year. It offered a cohort of peers for bonding, three former residents said. Residents were Google’s “most diverse pool” of software engineers and came “primarily from underrepresented groups,” according to a June 2020 presentation and an accompanying letter to management that one source said over 500 current and former residents signed. Compared with other software engineers, residents received the lowest possible pay for their employment level, a smaller year-end bonus and no stock, creating a compensation deficit “in the mid tens of thousands of dollars,” the presentation said. Nearly all residents converted to regular employees, according to the presentation. Many alumni years later have continued to feel the “negative effect” of their starting pay on their current salary, it said. Google said it worked to eliminate long-term disparities when hiring residents permanently.
Interesting. The protest thing seems to be one way to catch the attention of the president of the digital science club working overtime to deliver quantum supremacy.
Stephen E Arnold, June 24, 2021
Google: Me Too, a Refrigerator, and Innovation
June 23, 2021
Okay, pantry, refrigerator, on ice, whatever. Google is not an innovator; it is a me too outfit. I read “Si! Das Ist Richtig! Google’s Reportedly Building a Duolingo Competitor.” The write up reveals:
the company is preparing a new product called Tivoli that’ll be rolled out later this year. It’ll initially work on text, and will live in Google Search.
I thought I saw a Google slide deck in 2006 which had this in a dot point. Oh, well, history is not exactly what thumbtypers do these days.
The write up states:
Whenever Google launches its efforts, it might a heavy competition from other industry leaders such as Babel, Duolingo, and Rosetta Stone. According to a report by Meticulous Research analytics firm, the online language learning market is set to reach $21.2 billion by 2027. And it wouldn’t surprise me if the search giant is gearing up to grab a big chunk of that booty.
Okay, big numbers and competitors who are entrenched.
What’s interesting is that Google is pulling some of its preserved groceries out of the warehouse and presenting them as alternatives to self driving cars which are sort of self driving, solving death which is a thorny problem, and floating ideas which show that the mom and pop online advertising store is not out of ideas.
There’s a freezer in the company garage stuffed with me toos. Just add marketing, shake, and serve.
Stephen E Arnold, June 23, 2021
Why Messrs Brin and Page Said Adios
June 22, 2021
Years ago I signed a document saying I could not reveal any information obtained, intuited, learned, or received by any means electrical or mechanical from an interesting company for which I did some trivial work. I have been a good person, and I will continue of that path in this short blog post based on open source info and my own cogitations.
Yes, the GOOG. I want to remind readers that in 2019, the dynamic duo, the creators of Backrub, and the beneficiaries of some possible inspiration from Yahoo, GoTo.com, and Overture stepped away from their mom and pop online advertising store. With lots of money and eternal fame in the pantheon of online superstars, this was a good decision. Based on my understanding of information in open sources, the two decades of unparalleled fun was drawing to a close. Thus, hasta la vista. From my point of view, these visionaries who understood the opportunities to sell ads rendered silly ideas like doing good toothless. Go for the gold because there was no meaningful regulation as long as their was blood lust for tchotchkes like blinking Google pins or mouse pads with the Google logo.
But there were in open source information hints of impending trouble; for example:
- Management issues, both personal and company centric. Who can forget drug overdoses, attempted suicides, and baby daddies in the legal department? Certainly not the online indexes which provide valid links here, here, and here. Keep in mind, gentle reader, that these items are from open sources.
- Grousing from Web site owners, partners, and developers. The Foundem persistence gave hope to many that others would speak up despite Google’s power, money, and flotillas of legal destroyers.
- Annoying bleats about competition were emitted with ever increasing stridency from those clueless EU officials. Example number one: Margrethe Vestager. Danes fouled up taking over England, other Scandinavia countries, and lost the lead in ham to the questionable Spanish who fed cinco jota pigs acorns.
Nope, bail out time.
I offer these prefatory sentences because those commenting, tweeting, and blogging about “Google Executives See Cracks in Their Company’s Success” seem to have forgotten the glorious past of the Google. I noted this statement which is eerily without historical context and presented as a novel idea:
But a restive class of Google executives worry that the company is showing cracks. They say Google’s work force is increasingly outspoken. Personnel problems are spilling into the public. Decisive leadership and big ideas have given way to risk aversion and incrementalism. And some of those executives are leaving and letting everyone know exactly why.
Okay. But Messrs Brin and Page left. This is a surprise? Why? The high school science club management method is no longer fun. The crazy technology is expensive and old. The Foosball table needs resurfacing. The bean bags smell. And — news flash — when Elvis left the building, the show was over.
Messrs Brin and Page left the building. Got the picture?
Stephen E Arnold, June 22, 2021
Google: What Is the Value of Fake News? What Did You Say?
June 18, 2021
I read a story which may be hogwash. (If you have ever cleaned a pig, you can recall the delights of that exercise on a 90 degree day in Poland China territory. Note to thumbtypers. Poland China is another name for a Warren County hog.)
The title of the write certainly caught my attention:
Nearly Half of All Ads on Fake News Sites Come from Google, Study Finds
Let’s be clear I am pointing you a second hand write up from a research outfit’s “study.” Frankly I can’t believe that the estimable Google, former employer of Timnit Gebru, and owner of the real artificial intelligence methodology would be engaged in this type of activity. Goodness.
The outfit doing the study was the University of Mich8igan School of Information. Didn’t one of the founders of the Google attend this institution? Here’s a sampling of data from the outfit which spawned really annoying pop up surveys on government Web sites in the 2000s:
- 48% of ad traffic on “fake” news publishers is served by Google
- 32% of “low credibility sites” like Breitbart, Drudge Report, and Sputnik News were delivered by Google
- “The top-10 credible ad servers, like Lockerdome and Outbrain, make up 66.7% of fake and 55.6% of low-quality ad traffic.”
May I repeat what Google has oft repeated when the unpleasant but profitable subject of using whatever gets clicks to produce revenue? Here goes:
the search engine told Marketing Brew in a statement that the company removed ads from “more than 1.3 billion pages that breached” its policies in 2020. “We have strict publisher policies against promoting dangerous and misrepresentative claims,” it said.
Several questions:
- Will Google provide more funding to the Ann Arbor institution in order to provide input into research project plans before the study and the results are made public by real news outfits like Marketing Brew?
- Will Larry Page spend time on campus chatting with researchers and students about the importance of the Google and how to get an insider track to a job at the online ad mom and pop store?
- Will some MBA with time on his or her hands convert these percentages to revenue?
I, on the other hand, will continue to believe in the commitment to ethical business practices, ethical content filtering, and ethical AI just like the Google.
One final question: Will Marketing Brew experience an uptick in its Google “quality” score?
Stephen E Arnold, June 18, 2021
Google Tracking: Not Too Obvious Angle, Right?
June 18, 2021
Apple is the privacy outfit. Remember? Google wants to do away with third party cookies, right? Apple was sufficiently unaware to know that the company was providing a user’s information. Now Google has added a new, super duper free service. I learned about this wonderful freebie in “Google Workspace Is Now Free for Everyone — Here’s How to Get It.” I noted this paragraph:
Anyone with a Google account can use the integrated platform (formerly known as G Suite) to collaborate on the search giant’s productivity apps.
Free. Register. Agree to the terms.
Bingo. Magical, stateful opportunities for any vendor using this unbeatable approach. Need more? The Google will have a premium experience on offer soon.
Cookies? Nope. Better method I posit. And if there is some Fancy Dan tracking? Apple did not know some stuff, and I might wager Google won’t either.
Stephen E Arnold, June 18, 2021
The Myth, the Man: Sundar Sundararajan
June 17, 2021
Want to know about the young Sundararajan? Navigate to “5 Stories Shared By Sundar Pichai From His IIT Days That Will Make Engineers Miss Their College.” Here’s the menu of biographical morsels in the write up:
- Changed name and misused an epithet. More info here, including the shutting down of a four star eatery.
- Met wife and confessed love in the final year of their engineering.
- Wrote with “big hand”. Like Donald Trump’s signature maybe?
- Persecuted or “ragged” by those older than he.
- Studied metallurgical engineering, played cricket, and ate Maggi which looks like a vendor of essentials like instant noodles.
Now you know about the Young Sundar. As some say about cricket, “When you are out, you are in. When you are in, you are out.”
Stephen E Arnold, June 18, 2021
Google and Ethics: Shaken and Stirred Up
June 17, 2021
Despite recent controversies, Vox Recode reports, “Google Says it’s Committed to Ethical AI Research. Its Ethical AI Team Isn’t So Sure.” In fact, it sounds like there is a lot of uncertainty for the department whose immediate leaders have not been replaced since they were ousted and who reportedly receive little guidance or information from the higher-ups. Reporter Shirin Ghaffary writes:
“Some current members of Google’s tightly knit ethical AI group told Recode the reality is different from the one Google executives are publicly presenting. The 10-person group, which studies how artificial intelligence impacts society, is a subdivision of Google’s broader new responsible AI organization. They say the team has been in a state of limbo for months, and that they have serious doubts company leaders can rebuild credibility in the academic community — or that they will listen to the group’s ideas. Google has yet to hire replacements for the two former leaders of the team. Many members convene daily in a private messaging group to support each other and discuss leadership, manage themselves on an ad-hoc basis, and seek guidance from their former bosses. Some are considering leaving to work at other tech companies or to return to academia, and say their colleagues are thinking of doing the same.”
See the article for more of the frustrations facing Google’s remaining AI ethics researchers. The loss of these workers would not be good for the company, which relies on the department to lend a veneer of responsibility to its algorithmic initiatives. Right now, though, Google seems more interested in plowing ahead with its projects than in taking its own researchers, or their work, seriously. Its reputation in the academic community has tanked, we are told. A petition signed by thousands of computer science instructors and researchers called Gebru’s firing “unprecedented research censorship,” a prominent researcher and diversity activists are rejecting Google funding, a Google-run workshop was boycotted by prospective speakers, and the AI ethics research conference FAccT suspended the company’s membership. Meanwhile, Ghaffary reports, at least four employees have resigned and given Gebru’s treatment as the reason. Other concerned employees are taking the opposite approach, staying on in the hope they can make a difference. As one unnamed researcher states:
“Google is so powerful and has so much opportunity. It’s working on so much cutting-edge AI research. It feels irresponsible for no one who cares about ethics to be here.”
We agree, but there is only so much mid-level employees can do. When will Google executives begin to care about developing AI programs conscientiously? When regulators somehow make it more expensive to ignore ethics concerns than to embrace them, we suspect. We will not hold our breath.
Cynthia Murrell, June 17, 2021
A Google Survey: The Cloud Has Headroom
June 17, 2021
Google sponsored a study. You can read it here. There’s a summary of the report in “Manufacturers Allocate One Third of Overall IT Spend to AI, Survey Shows.”
First, the methodology is presented on the final page of the report. Here’s a snippet:
The survey was conducted online by The Harris Poll on behalf of Google Cloud, from October 15 to November 4, 2020, among 1,154 senior manufacturing executives in France (n=150), Germany (n=200), Italy (n=154), Japan (n=150), South Korea (n=150), the UK (n=150), and the U.S. (n=200) who are employed full-time at a company with more than 500 employees, and who work in the manufacturing industry with a title of director level or higher. The data in each country was weighted by number of employees to bring them into line with actual company size proportions in the population. A global post-weight was applied to ensure equal weight of each country in the global total.
Google apparently wants to make data a singular noun. That’s Googley. Also, there are two references to weighting; however, there are no data for how the weighting factors were calculated nor why the weighting factors were need for what boils down to a set of countries representing the developed world. I did not spot any information about the actual selection process; for example, mailing out a request to a larger set and then taking those who self select is a practice I have encountered in the past. Was that the method in use here? How much back and forth was there between the Harris unit and the Google managers prior to the crafting of the final report? Does this happen? Sure, those who pay want a flash report and then want to “talk about” the data. Is it possible weighting factors were used to make the numbers flow? I don’t know. The study was conducted in the depths of the Covid crisis. Was that a factor? Were those in the sample producing revenue from their AI infused investments? Sorry, no data available.
What were the findings?
Surprise, surprise. Artificial intelligence is a hot button in the manufacturing sector. Those who are into smart software are spending a hefty chunk of their “spend” budget for it. If that AI is delivered from the cloud, then bingo, the headroom for growth is darned good.
The bad news is that two thirds of those in the sample are into AI already. The big tech sharks will be swarming to upsell those early adopters and compete ferociously for the remaining one third who have yet to get the message that AI is a big deal.
Guess what countries are leaders in AI. If you said China, wrong. Go for Italy and Germany. The US was in the middle of the pack. The laggards were Japan and Korea. And China? Hey, sorry, I did not see those data in the report. My bad.
Interesting stuff in these sponsored research projects with unexplained weightings which line up with what the Google says it is doing really well.
Stephen E Arnold, June 17, 2021
Are 15 Square Feet Enough? A Question for the Google
June 15, 2021
I flipped through the dead tree edition of the outstanding sun-like Wall Street Journal this morning (June 15, 2021). And what did I find inside the edition which sometimes makes its way to Harrod’s Creek, Kentucky? The answer was a four page ad in the Murdoch infused Wall Street Journal. Each page is about 23 inches by 24 inches. That works out to 552 square inches (give or take a few due to variances in trim sizes) per page. With four pages, the total is more than 2,208 square inches of dead tree space or larger than the vinyl floor protector under my discount store office chair and that of one of my assistant’s floor protectors. Which is better vinyl floor protectors or dead tree paper? I am on the fence.
Above is a thumbnail of the four page Google ad in the June 15, 2021, Wall Street Journal.
What’s the message in the ad? At first glance, the ad is pitching a free Google service. Some people perceive Google free services as having a modest cost. Here in Harrod’s Creek, we love the freebies from the Google. In this particular case, Google is pitching this message:
If you want to show the world how it’s done, you have to change the way you do things.
Change is hard, and it depends on whether the change is motivated internally like the good old but out of fashion notion of self improvement, gumption, and Go West, young man! Or whether the change is imposed on one; for example, Rupert Murdoch had constraints on unauthorized telephone tapping imposed on his otherwise outstanding organization. There is also an Orwellian type change which can be more difficult for those lacking critical thinking skills to identify. A good example of this is assertions made under oath in the US Congress that certain high technology companies will do better. The companies then keep on keepin’ on as some in Harrod’s Creek say.
The interior two pages convey this message:
Say hello to Google Workspace.
The text explains that Google Workspace is pretty much like Salesforce Slack, Microsoft Teams, and the ever wonderful and avant garde Cisco Webex service, the somewhat popular Zoom, among others. The most interesting passage in the advertisement is the explanation of “how we do it here too”:
All 100K+ Google employees – from engineering, to marketing, to the PhDs in the quantum lab—relay on Google Workspace every day. Our scientists leave comments in research doss, and the security team keeps our inboxes clear of spam and viruses. Google’s entire business is riding on it, just like yours. Because no matter the task at hand, when your customers are depending on your. Google Workspace is how it’s done.
What came to mind was “how it’s done” in staff management. Dare I mention Dr. Timnit Gebru? No, I don’t dare. What about the subtle management vibes at DeepMind. Nope, I know zero about that too. What about … Nope, no more of this management thinking. Life’s too short. (I wonder if critiques of Dr. Gebru’s AI ethics paper were handled within this Workspace thing?)
The final page lists alleged customers (users) of Google Workspace. These include Grandma’s, Operation BBQ Relief, and Ms.. Kim’s class, among others.
Some observations are warranted by this lavish presentation of the Google Workspace message in the dead tree edition of a traditional newspaper nestled within the woke empire of News Corp. Herewith:
- I find it amusing to think that the world’s largest online advertising outfit is pitching its Workspace product in a medium which is centuries old, non digital, and mostly reporting that water which has passed under the bridge over information
- I would like to see the ad reach data and conversion estimate for pulling new customers based on this rather impressive expanse of newspaper. My hunch is that the Google wanted to send a message, probably to Microsoft. Why not email the outstanding leader working hard to eliminate cyber security risks?
- The organizations mentioned as customers (users) are interesting. Links to case examples of what’s shaking at Grandma’s or Ms. Kim’s class would be fascinating. The wonky little icons in the ad are interesting but “yinka” was a bit of a puzzle to me.
Net net: Is Google changing or does Google want others to change from Microsoft Teams to Workspace? My hunch is that Google is assuming that the Greek god Koalemos will make their endeavor a home run.
Stephen E Arnold, June 15, 2021
Post Shake Up, DeepMind Explains It Has the Secret AI Sauce
June 15, 2021
Do you remember the power struggle between the posh DeepMinders and the Mountain View crowd? No. Oh, well, no problem. Here’s the short version: Mountain View triumphed. Is that the Mountain View unit which wrestled with ethical AI? Answer: Yep, so what? Mountain View won. DeepMind lost.
I think I have spotted the first official statement which suggests the direction the post-skirmish Google AI jabber will go. Sure, I may be wrong, but let’s take a look at what’s revealed in “DeepMind Researchers Say Reinforcement Learning Is the Key to Cracking General AI.” [If you want to get some info about reinforcement learning, try this link. For a run down of other AI “religions”, check out this link. ]
Now let’s look at the write up “DeepMind Researchers Say…” passage:
In a new paper submitted to the peer-reviewed Artificial Intelligence journal, scientists at UK-based AI lab DeepMind argue that intelligence and its associated abilities will emerge not from formulating and solving complicated problems but by sticking to a simple but powerful principle: reward maximization.
I ask, “But what if other methods are useful?” The response I hypothesize, “Well, we’re the DeepMind Google.”
There is this statement quoted in the “DeepMind Researchers Say” article:
“Reinforcement learning assumes that the agent has a finite set of potential actions. A reward signal and value function have been specified. In other words, the problem of general intelligence is precisely to contribute those things that reinforcement learning requires as a pre-requisite,” Roitblat said. “So, if machine learning can all be reduced to some form of optimization to maximize some evaluative measure, then it must be true that reinforcement learning is relevant, but it is not very explanatory.”
I have put in bold face and red the operative word in this quasi quantum supremacy type statement from the online ad agency: “If.”
Yep, if, the close cousin of would, coulda, shoulda, and “I apologize.”
Stephen E Arnold, June 15, 2021
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
