Why I Left Google DeepMind

The Pond

SearchSearchSearch

Tags

deepmind<br>personal<br>AI

About this post

Read time: 54 minutes<br>Published on July 15th, 2026<br>Updated on July 15th, 2026

Links to this page

A Red Line and Oversight Framework for Government AI ContractsI wrote this document in my personal time and had it reviewed by experts in military and surveillance law. You can also read the raw Markdown for this document.

Why I Left Google DeepMind<br>By Alex Turner<br>Published on July 15th, 2026

Table of Contents

Google supports the immigration enforcement supply chainBut how could I do anything about it?

Talking to Jeff Dean<br>The Pentagon tries to intimidate AnthropicI wanted to mobilize the AI luminaries at the conference<br>Talking to Bengio and Stuart<br>Stuart closes out iaseai<br>International Association of Silence on the Ethics of AI

Trying to stop Google from signingBuilding internal cost for Google<br>Jeff Dean, you’re our only hope<br>Jeff signs an amicus brief supporting Anthropic

Senior management insisted Google wouldn’t cave<br>Preparing for lunch with Jeff DeanI arranged social support<br>The art of the deal

My lunch with JeffSearching for another path to impact

No one is responding, so why not just DM the ceo?My Framework goes unevaluated

Google quietly signs the deal<br>Demis insists Google’s AI principles “haven’t changed”We can “work with Western democracies” to “beat China” without giving in to every demand Trump makes<br>Building a world-reshaping technology on personal trust

ReflectionsHow can a pledge-signer remain at gdm?<br>The weight of ethics<br>What are the AI luminaries doing?<br>Why didn’t Jeff put his foot down?<br>Breaking free of roles

Why I left Google DeepMind<br>Similar posts<br>Appendix: Anticipated questionsWhat if the people you critique were saving their political capital?<br>Maybe they thought you weren’t worth their time; you aren’t entitled to their help<br>Every person shouldn’t have to speak out about every issue<br>Even if Google had adopted your Framework, the Pentagon would have refused<br>Does this have any impact on existential risk from AI?

Appendix: “Don’t worry, it’s only api access”<br>Footnotes

In January, Department of Homeland Security (dhs) officers killed at least two people. In both cases, a federal agent grasped his gun, aimed it at a peaceful citizen, and shot them dead.

Renée Good, moments before dhs killed her.

Alex Pretti, moments before dhs killed him.

I learned that Google sells its Cloud services to the relevant agencies within dhs. I thought that was wrong. Federal agents should not be able to kill citizens in the street. I set out to find the most effective way to push my company to stop serving these agencies. My divestment campaign quickly broadened into an attempt to prevent Google from signing an unethical military AI deal, as the Pentagon started pressuring AI providers into military AI deals with no restrictions against use for killer robots or mass surveillance.1

I wanted AI ethics commitments to hold under pressure. In particular, I wanted Google DeepMind (gdm) to maintain its existing commitment against supporting killer robots. Over several months, I asked many people to act. I asked senior people⁠—respected people⁠—people with reputations silvered by their concern about AI ethics and safety. Nearly all declined.

Take Stuart Russell, a famous AI researcher who spent over a decade crusading against autonomous weapons. I worked at his lab for years. At a conference, on-stage, he agreed to push his organization to make a statement supporting AI providers against government coercion and promised a poll of its members. The statement and poll both vanished.

Or take Jeff Dean, who is Google’s Chief Scientist and the co-lead of Google’s Gemini AI project. In 2018, Jeff signed a pledge to never support the development or use of killer robots. I got Jeff to publicly and boldly co-sign an amicus brief (where outsiders weigh in to sway a lawsuit) backing Anthropic against the Pentagon. But I also asked him to use his immense leverage to stop Google from making its own unethical deal with the military, and I don’t think he did. He remains at Google despite his pledge.

I wrote a 25-⁠page proposal containing contract language and oversight mechanisms. Military- and surveillance-law experts praised the proposal, which represented a principled counteroffer Google could have stood by. I sent the proposal to Demis Hassabis (gdm’s ceo) who routed it to senior policy staff, only for the proposal to wilt unattended until Google signed a deal.

Senior management had insisted that Google wouldn’t sign. I disagreed with them, but they largely ignored my warnings. While I may have increased the Pentagon’s hesitation around the deal, Google still signed a deal handing over their AI without restrictions against killer robots or mass AI spying. Google’s contract restrictions were even weaker than OpenAI’s. At that point, I couldn’t stay at Google in good conscience, so I left.

This essay tells the...