3 ms·
Their paper was accepted by the conference's peer review system. Google, not researchers in the community, wanted it retracted. The only logical explanation is
by malcolmgreaves 6y ago
Their paper was accepted by the conference's peer review system. Google, not researchers in the community, wanted it retracted. The only logical explanation is that it was good science that did not put Google is a positive light.
- defen 6y ago> Their paper was accepted by the conference's peer review system. Source? The linked article says it was submitted but nothing about whether it was accepted. If it was accepted, is it available for public viewing?
- croissants 6y agoI don't think the paper has been accepted, because the conference itself has not made decisions on the papers. This article [1] says that the paper was submitted to "ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency", which sends paper decisions (accept or reject) next week [2]. Of course, it might be accepted at that time, but that doesn't seem to be decided yet. [1] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-12-03/google-s-co-head-of-ethical-ai-says-she-was-fired-over-email https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-12-03/google-s-... [2] https://facctconference.org/2021/cfp.html https://facctconference.org/2021/cfp.html
- Kalium 6y agoWhat's your experience with corporate internal processes been? Mine has been that they often exhibit an extreme disinterest in the judgment of external parties that are not part of the internal process. Whether or not the external group accepts the paper was likely irrelevant to what would be internally seen as a breach of process. Generally "It worked out, everything's fine" is not a line that flies.