6 ms·

> And even if the ethical obligations were identical, Gebru’s violation toward Google wouldn’t excuse Google’s toward Mitchell. What about Mitchell's violation

• dragonwriter 6y ago
  > What about Mitchell's violation towards Google? If we accept Google's own claims, they have an automated indication which leads to suspicion of that and on ongoing investigation, not even something where they are prepared to claim an actual violation. i.e., exactly the circumstances where every half competent organization would decline comment (potentially citing “personnel matters” until they'd actually completed an investigation.)
  • mikejb 6y ago
    So you say you suspect they have an ongoing investigation, and that would be "circumstances where every half competent organization would decline comment" What substantiates this conclusion? They can have an investigation ongoing, and share the cause for said investigation. In the statement they explicitly establish that this doesn't imply guilt of the account owner. Why are you so triggered by this clarification?
    • dragonwriter 6y ago
      > What substantiates this conclusion? My experience over a lifetime as a news consumer of seeing how organizations deal with media inquiries about personnel matters. > Why are you so triggered by this clarification? Grow up.
      • mikejb 6y ago
        Your 'experience' explains a lot about your opinion. Have a good day, stay safe.