Sick of Zoom meetings? Send Otter Assistant to attend your next one

What’s worse than missing a meeting? Attending one. So say most workers and managers, even as more meetings were held in the last 15 months than perhaps in any previous 450-day period. Otter.ai wants to free you from taking notes at virtual and hybrid meetings—and maybe even from attending them. Its deep-learning voice-transcription service can now scan your Google or Outlook calendar for Zoom sessions, automatically sign in at the appropriate time, and produce a live transcription that you and other participants can correct, annotate, and highlight in real time. Or—if you’ve ditched the meeting—your colleagues can while you’re busy elsewhere Read More …

Amid worker and regulator complaints, Google is facing a turning point

By any measure, Google is a colossus of the tech industry, with a market capitalization of nearly $1.5 trillion , a massive army of lobbyists , and elite academics at its disposal . But lately, its reputation has been hurt by a highly publicized feud with well-respected ethical AI researchers, and revelations about its toxic workplace, previously hidden under NDAs , are roiling the tech giant’s PR-spun Disneyland-like facade. Now, it’s facing a multitude of challenges including talent attrition, resistance from an increasingly influential union, and increased public scrutiny. Privacy-centered competitors are nipping at its ankles, antitrust regulations loom on the horizon, and user interest in de-Googling their online activities is mounting. These headwinds are threatening the tech giant’s seemingly unassailable industry dominance and may bring us closer to a “de-Googled” world, where Google is no longer the default. At war with its workers In December 2020, the tech giant dismissed eminent scholar Timnit Gebru over a research paper that analyzed the bias inherent in large AI models that analyze human language—a type of AI that undergirds Google Search. Google’s whiplash-inducing reversal on ethics and diversity as soon as its core business was threatened was not entirely surprising. However, its decision to cover this up with a bizarre story claiming that Gebru resigned sparked widespread incredulity. Since Gebru’s ouster, Google has since fired her colleague Margaret Mitchell and restructured its “responsible AI” division under the leadership of another Black woman , now known to have deep links to surveillance technologies. These events sent shock waves through the research community beholden to Google for funding and triggered much-needed introspection about the insidious influence of Big Tech in this space . Last week, the organizers of the Black in AI, Queer in AI, and Widening NLP groups announced their decision to end their sponsorship relationship with Google in response. While the prestige and lucrative compensation that comes from working at Google is still a huge draw for many who don’t consider these issues a dealbreaker, some, such as Black in AI cofounder and scholar Rediet Abebe , were always wary. As Abebe explained in a tweet, her decision to back out of an internship at the tech giant was triggered by Google’s mistreatment of BIPOC, involvement with military warfare technologies, and ouster of Meredith Whittaker , another well-known AI researcher who played a lead role in the Google Walkout in 2018 . Abebe is not the only one who has decided to walk away from Google. In response to this latest AI ethics debacle, leading researcher Luke Stark turned down a significant monetary award , other talented engineers resigned , and Gebru’s much-respected manager Samy Bengio also left the company. A few years back this level of pushback would be unimaginable given Google’s formidable clout, but the tech giant seems to have met its match in Gebru and other workers who refuse to back down. Even with its formidable PR machinery spinning out an announcement touting an expanded AI ethics team, the damage has been done, and Google’s misguided actions will hurt its ability to attract credible talent for the foreseeable future. More ex-employees are also coming out with details of their horrifying experience s, adding fuel to the rising calls for better employee protections. These disclosures have renewed support for tech workers as hundreds of Google employees unionized after many years of activism, despite union-busting efforts by their employer. Read More …

Meet the mystery woman who mastered IBM’s 5,400-character Chinese typewriter

I had seen this woman before. Many times now. I was certain of it. But who was she? In a film from 1947, she’s operating an electric Chinese typewriter, the first of its kind, manufactured by IBM. Semi-circled by journalists, and a nervous-looking middle-aged Chinese man—Kao Chung-chin, the engineer who invented the machine—she radiates a smile as she pulls a sheet of paper from the device. Kao is biting his lip, his eyes darting back and forth intently between the crowd and the typist. As soon as I saw that film, I began to riffle through my files. I’m a professor of Chinese history at Stanford University, and I was years into a book project on the history of modern Chinese information technology—and the Chinese typewriter specifically. By that point, I had amassed a large and still-growing body of source materials, including archival documents, historic photographs, and even antique machines. My office was becoming something of a private museum. As I thought, I’d encountered the typist previously in my research, in glossy IBM brochures and on the cover of Chinese magazines. Who was she? Why did she appear so frequently, so prominently, in the history of IBM’s effort to electrify the Chinese language? Read More …

Meet the mystery woman who mastered IBM’s 5,400-character Chinese typewriter

I had seen this woman before. Many times now. I was certain of it. But who was she? In a film from 1947, she’s operating an electric Chinese typewriter, the first of its kind, manufactured by IBM. Semi-circled by journalists, and a nervous-looking middle-aged Chinese man—Kao Chung-chin, the engineer who invented the machine—she radiates a smile as she pulls a sheet of paper from the device. Kao is biting his lip, his eyes darting back and forth intently between the crowd and the typist. As soon as I saw that film, I began to riffle through my files. I’m a professor of Chinese history at Stanford University, and I was years into a book project on the history of modern Chinese information technology—and the Chinese typewriter specifically. By that point, I had amassed a large and still-growing body of source materials, including archival documents, historic photographs, and even antique machines. My office was becoming something of a private museum. As I thought, I’d encountered the typist previously in my research, in glossy IBM brochures and on the cover of Chinese magazines. Who was she? Why did she appear so frequently, so prominently, in the history of IBM’s effort to electrify the Chinese language? The IBM Chinese typewriter was a formidable machine—not something just anyone could handle with the aplomb of the young typist in the film. On the keyboard affixed to the hulking, gunmetal gray chassis, 36 keys were divided into four banks: 0 through 5; 0 through 9; 0 through 9; and 0 through 9. With just these 36 keys, the machine was capable of producing up to 5,400 Chinese characters in all, wielding a language that was infinitely more difficult to mechanize than English or other Western writing systems Read More …

After claiming to care about more than profit, corporate America still hasn’t found its soul

In 2019, 181 of America’s top CEOs made a bold, collective statement to the world: A company’s purpose had to be more than just making a return for its investors. This powerful group argued that there are other stakeholders in the equation that companies need to be answerable to, including customers, employees, suppliers, and the communities these companies serve. This statement flew in the face of the long-running capitalist mantra of maximizing shareholder value, and many experts argued that it was about time. Being the CEO of a publicly traded company today is a whole different ball game than what it was even two decades ago. Consumer activism is far more prevalent today thanks to access to social media. One study estimates that about 38% of all Americans boycott at least one company at any given point in time, with the number of boycotters growing double digits annually. The Fairtrade movement, which ensures that suppliers such as farmers get paid fairly, has been consistently growing in popularity for the past several decades. The conspicuous impact of the Black Lives Matter movement as well as the divisive presidential term of Donald Trump highlighted that companies could no longer remain indifferent to the political opinions of the communities they served. All these macro trends, coupled with an increased urgency around climate change, meant that the public at large warmly welcomed corporate America’s new statement of purpose.  For the optimists among us, it appeared that corporate America had finally taken the first step to discovering its soul. Yet, nearly two years later, we do not have much to show for it. In fact, just a few months ago, one of the more prominent advocates of the corporation-with-a-soul movement, Danone CEO Emmanuel Faber, was unceremoniously removed from his position. Shareholders ousted Faber because he could not generate a return for them during his tenure as CEO. Ironically, his public firing did not generate any uproar from the other stakeholders he had focused on serving. A sobering reality Corporate accountability can be a tricky thing to get right. Despite their elite statuses and high-compensation levels, most CEOs and top managers operate within the same framework as regular employees. They get hired for top jobs based on their skills, networks, and experience, are incentivized to perform well and can get fired if they don’t. Read More …