Back

Why I Left Google DeepMind

85 points56 minutesturntrout.com
recitedropper31 minutes ago

Nothing but respect to TurnTrout for taking an action like this. The world needs more smart people who are willing to stand for what they feel is right, despite the pressures otherwise. Without that occurring more, our species is going to lose many impactful prisoner's dilemmas coming these next two decades.

This raises my respect for AI researchers a little bit too. I have often felt that the entire industry is pretty tainted to the core, and for better or worse that colors my opinion of the researchers.

Maybe I'm in the minority, but I thought it was gross to download pirated art for a student project when I was at Berkeley years ago. So it has been really sad to me to see many of the most brilliant minds of this generation answering the siren song of disrespecting the collective effort of others to extract and resell residual value.

I'd guess TurnTrout doesn't agree on that framing, otherwise he probably would not have been at Deep Mind. But clearly he and I agree on other ethical positions; I am nothing but glad to see him stick to his principles here.

yw341024 minutes ago

Apologies, but it would be good to add links for your anecdotes.

Not all of the readers of your comment have the appropriate context and know what you're talking about. I certainly don't.

recitedropper19 minutes ago

Hmm, links for what? My student project? The decisions that face humanity that are pretty clearly modellable as prisoner's dilemmas?

Otherwise not sure what I could cite--I would assume most all on this forum know that AI is trained on the works of other people, without their permission to do so. I guess you could disagree with my framing, but I wouldn't think this requires a citation.

I think maybe my writing wasn't clear, and it sounded like I was referrencing some well known thing that happened at UC Berkeley. I have edited it to read more cleanly!

slowin18 minutes ago

Props to the author. I left Microsoft due to their work with Israel to spy on Palestinians and record all of their phone conversations (in addition to other IDF collaborations). They ended up walking some of it back, but Satya was complicit.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/sep/25/microsoft-bloc...

srameshc17 minutes ago

I did not know about TurnTrout till now and thanks to HN community now I know. I am beyond impressed as to how he lives by his principles. I don't think I have this kind of courgae or confidence and thankfully I don't work for Google or have to quit it. On the other hand we have smart people who have choose to work for companies like Palantir and are proud of it.

seydor26 minutes ago

Principled people have become so rare

inamiyar25 minutes ago

This is a long post about someone who has very obviously just gotten into politics. It is good for people to try and see how to impart change. Here are some constructive critical questions for the author:

1. Why no mention of No Tech For Apartheid or Google Workers United, who have been doing similar work for years?

2. What about all of the other police, DHS, and military contracts Google has been a part of? Did this problem really just start with the second (not even the first!) Trump presidency?

3. What does a focus on exclusively those at the top levels of a hierarchy, with minimal focus on incentive structures and wider systems, say about your theory of change? Was there a power analysis done, or was it assumed that "big title" = "powerful"?

Side Note: Incredibly insulting of James Dean to say email 3 CEOs.

tomrod27 minutes ago

If the author were to read these comments, I'd commiserate with them on the disappointment of the utopia left behind in the service of acquiring wealth and power. An abundant solarpunk future enabled and augmented by AI, hyped so well by early Google and Kurzweil, captured as capital to earn a buck for shareholders.

Mad props for pushing as far as they could push.

bigyabai44 minutes ago

> Even if Google had adopted your Framework, the Pentagon would have refused

> I agree. xAI would still have given over their AI. But if Google had given signs of independence earlier, it could perhaps have built a coalition with OpenAI and Anthropic.

This is like saying that Google and Apple might build a coalition to prevent App Store regulation. These are competitors, they all see moral flexibility as an advantage. They're not going to take a moralist stance if their federal protection is predicated on federal cooperation. All of these FAANG businesses have already bent the knee in anticipation of this, xAI is just riding the coattails of the federal quid-pro-quo.

When you go to work at a megacorp, you're always leaving your ethics at the door. Yes, there's an attractive pie-in-the-sky fantasy that Apple does care about human rights, or that Google isn't evil, but they're always just lies. I disagree with a lot of GCP's customers, but I'm still shocked that a DeepMind employee would make it this far in the career pipeline before seeing the soylent green get made.

awakeasleep29 minutes ago

Competitors often wish they didn't have to compete.

For example, a cartel is "a group of independent market participants who collaborate with each other and avoid competition in order to improve profits and dominate the market"

It's something that could happen in this world, through the collective action of employees, that corporate strategy can be changed.

worldthruword22 minutes ago

I hope he becomes the seed crystal around which crystallization of peaceful use of AI happens.

bigyabai26 minutes ago

> through the collective action of employees, that corporate strategy can be changed.

I just don't agree with this. I'd like to, but the corporate strategy is not being set by rank-and-file engineers. Sam Altman, Dario Amodei, Elon Musk - these are the executives that are steering the ship. You can change the culture internally and cause a lot of strife, but typically you don't have control over the strategy. If the executive says you're giving API access to the NSA, then that's what is going to happen.

busterarm29 minutes ago

On the upside, I guess maybe DeepMind is hiring.

... I'm sure I'll get flamed into oblivion for this but it's weird to me how the zeitgeist is anti-colonialism but also against enforcing borders and national sovereignty. I guess maybe they are okay with it unless you're a western nation. Whatever, there's no room for nuanced opinions anymore in modern online discourse.

I'll admit to being a weird outlier on this. I may not like what certain parts of the government are doing but I'd go work for the Voldemort companies in a heartbeat -- they just require in-office and aren't anywhere near me. I'd rather my nation develop the best technologies than let other nations do it.

rvz27 minutes ago

If you do not like what Google is doing, just leave as I said before [0]. They don't care about you.

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47931336

spwa429 minutes ago

I mean, on the one hand, I support this. But this is going pretty far. When it comes to non-US police and military, if your threshold is killing 2 innocents (and the officers getting away with it), then you can't do business almost anywhere ...

With essentially any country, and even vaguely similar circumstances

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/nov/05/belgian-police...

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/aug/20/belgian-police...

And this is just a random example country (with excellent beer), you will find worse than this in most/all European countries, especially in the last 10 years or so.

jmcgough18 minutes ago

This is pretty different - in both of those, the officer faced consequences. Unidentified masked ICE officers have killed about a person a month with no consequences, many times over a civil concern (immigration status) or just getting annoyed with protesters who broke no laws. ICE is effectively a lethal extrajudicial force with no means of seeking accountability when they kill.

wiz21c26 minutes ago

IOW: "if I have to kill only 2-3 people to make the business I want to make, then, bah, so be it".

andriy_koval19 minutes ago

its more like: good luck finding clients who don't kill anyone somewhere deep inside their supply chain.

boston_clone22 minutes ago

your straw man is misrepresenting the scale of violence ICE has inflicted on communities across the country. the article states it was after Alex Pirettis death that he was inspired to act. ICE has killed many people across the country during activities which they have no business conducting. A man in Houston was killed last week, then days later, another in Maine. They’ve shot citizens and fabricated evidence to cover up their actions in multiple instances.

Wake the fuck up and stop trying to whatabout your way to a more comfortable mental state.

andriy_koval18 minutes ago

> They’ve shot citizens and fabricated evidence to cover up their actions in multiple instances.

typical police activity in this country protected by impunity.

draw_down22 minutes ago

[dead]

nicechianti23 minutes ago

[dead]

aew212034 minutes ago

tldr: scientist discovers reality

smallmancontrov22 minutes ago

If half of us were half as principled as this guy, the world would be a much better place.

wiz21c24 minutes ago

tldr: scientist tell us that defending one's values needs courage and strong will.

Chance-Device27 minutes ago

[flagged]

questionableans22 minutes ago

It’s because the way it’s being done in the US is unnecessarily brutal and arbitrarily discriminates more against people from certain countries.

mantas20 minutes ago

Vast majority of people against it seem to be against the principle, not against the implementation.

jpitz24 minutes ago

Immigration enforcement doesn't sound controversial, but murder should.

tomrod25 minutes ago

I think you might be accidentally or willingly misunderstanding the context if that is your takeaway -- no one, neither immigrant nor innocent bystander, should be killed because administrative warrants are being enforced. And ICE doesn't require hundreds of individuals deployed to one place. There simply was never a reason for such a surge.

EDIT: to the dead comment below -- your comment doesn't have to meet my approval -- the comment is simply at odds with reality and is a thought terminating cliche.

Feel free to take it in a more general framing: if you don't want people you don't support, while they are in power, killing people, take time to understand why others might be upset. Not only is it your civic duty, its also part of being in society.

Chance-Device17 minutes ago

I think this whole subthread is just showing the problem, my initial comment is flagged, my reply to you is flagged, I don’t believe either of these violate the site guidelines. You might take a sideways view of the second one but the first is just a statement of opinion. It doesn’t seem to be possible to discuss this, so I guess I just won’t try.

fastball21 minutes ago

[delayed]

Chance-Device21 minutes ago

What would you do instead?

Chance-Device24 minutes ago

[flagged]

wilg22 minutes ago

Well one way you can understand why the poster finds it controversial would be to read it before commenting.

mantas22 minutes ago

[flagged]