this post was submitted on 20 Mar 2026
218 points (97.8% liked)

Technology

82855 readers
3804 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
  • In an internal all-hands, Google DeepMind leaders addressed staff concerns about Pentagon work.
  • Leaders said there was a "robust process" to ensure the contracts align with Google's AI principles.
  • At the same time, leaders said Google was pursuing more contracts in areas like cybersecurity and biosecurity.
top 20 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] robomuffin79@lemmy.world 8 points 12 hours ago

Sadly true. All the tech giants either support genocide, spy on innocent citizens or socialise with billionaire paedophiles. In most cases, it’s all three things

[–] robomuffin79@lemmy.world 44 points 19 hours ago (2 children)

That would be a good time to leave and work for a company that does no evil

[–] trashboat@piefed.social 13 points 18 hours ago (2 children)

Like who? There aren’t many jobs around, let alone jobs in this field for companies that aren’t evil

[–] pageflight@piefed.social 4 points 14 hours ago

Yeah, got headhunted for 10 replace-doctors-with-AI startup for every 1 ed-tech company that even looked at my resume, and the company I'm at now, though good on paper, is squeezing AI into every nook and cranny as fast as they can while sidelining security concerns.

[–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 17 hours ago (1 children)
[–] corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca 2 points 12 hours ago* (last edited 12 hours ago)

I did non-profit work. If you wanna see absolute abuse of employees, go do non-profit. "You have to stay late (for free). Think of the children!"

They're chronically understaffed while sometimes overstaffed with volunteers who don't add to the expertise and still require experienced training every shift; but you can't ignore their attempt to contribute because "the children" need them. So your day is trying to get routine things done amid relentless interruption for the same thing you told an unskilled empty-nester yesterday.

It makes one say things that sound really bad in the reading of, like the bit above. I promise it's just experience and, while all effort is good, the least beneficial ones do stand out.

[–] njordomir@lemmy.world 7 points 16 hours ago

I got laid off by one of these big tech corporations and replaced by AI (in my opinion, they denied this). It couldn't have come at a better time because I was past the point where my ethics were allowing me to continue. Let someone else build, sell, and support the framework of global oppression. I wouldn't mind doing some Linux work (20+ years of Linux use, minor coding experience, some devops type stuff, but mostly support/sales). For now, I'm focused on my family and I might teach some dance in the meantime. Gotta dance while the world is burning; how else do I stay positive?

[–] Luminous5481@anarchist.nexus 12 points 16 hours ago

Imagine going back in time to when Google first launched and telling them their search engine would be murdering babies in the middle east on behalf of a right-wing ethno-nationalist theocracy that's waging religious war because they believe they're owed the whole region since God told them so.

[–] barnaclebutt@lemmy.world 12 points 17 hours ago* (last edited 17 hours ago) (2 children)

Don't do evil. Unless it makes you rich. Fuck you poors. Also, you don't own anything you Youtube addicted slobs. That free email wasn't worth it was it?

[–] JcbAzPx@lemmy.world 2 points 12 hours ago

They changed that motto years ago. I believe they got rid of the "don't".

[–] pageflight@piefed.social 3 points 14 hours ago

Leaders said there was a "robust process" to ensure the contracts align with Google's AI principles.

Ah, I think you've identified their "robust process" and what the key "principles" are.

[–] UnspecificGravity@piefed.social 13 points 19 hours ago (1 children)

Remember what we've been saying since Google started? If they aren't charging you then you aren't the customer, your the product.

What do you think they are selling to the Pentagon?

[–] HuudaHarkiten@piefed.social 5 points 18 hours ago

What do you think they are selling to the Pentagon?

Well, since google told me that they really care about my privacy and think its very important to keep things secret and safe... I assume they are selling Care Bears? Banana smoothies?

[–] whyNotSquirrel@sh.itjust.works 9 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

Who told who? Saying "Google told" make it looks like it's his own entity and can say things on his own.

That's how humans never face any consequences on their bullshits when they can hide behind a corporate name

[–] frongt@lemmy.zip 4 points 17 hours ago

They're named in the article

[–] webkitten@piefed.social 7 points 19 hours ago (1 children)

Ok but that's worse. You get how that's worse?

[–] HuudaHarkiten@piefed.social 4 points 18 hours ago

"Don't worry about it guys, we didn't poison the water supply, we just replaced it with sewage!"

[–] albert_inkman@lemmy.world 8 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

The "robust process" framing here is interesting. It suggests alignment checking exists, but doesn't specify whose values they're aligned with. Google's internal principles? The Pentagon's requirements? Public interest? Those can diverge pretty sharply.

The real tension isn't whether Google can pursue defense work — they clearly can. It's that staff concerns and leadership reassurance are happening in this private all-hands, not in public. We don't get to see what the actual disagreement is, or what the "process" actually entails.

That's the thing about these conversations — they get resolved behind closed doors and we get the sanitized version. Would be curious what the staff said back.

[–] etchinghillside@reddthat.com 1 points 18 hours ago

Even if this wasn’t defense related there’s usually a bit of a legal process with these sized deals and the contracts that are negotiated.

[–] Akh@lemmy.world 2 points 17 hours ago

Corporate welfare