5 ms·

This is the thread (it was a retweet with comment, naturally). https://twitter.com/ylecun/status/1275162528511860737 https://twitter.com/ylecun/status/12751625

This is the thread (it was a retweet with comment, naturally). https://twitter.com/ylecun/status/1275162528511860737 https://twitter.com/ylecun/status/1275162528511860737 Whatever your position, Yann engages on substance, and Timnit is obnoxious: https://twitter.com/timnitGebru/status/1275191341455048704?s=20 https://twitter.com/timnitGebru/status/1275191341455048704?s... https://twitter.com/timnitGebru/status/1275191515380215808?s=20 https://twitter.com/timnitGebru/status/1275191515380215808?s... Basically the worst of online discourse, but in this case one-sided. Yann is discussing in good faith and Timnit is not. If this is the normal way she interacts with people she disagrees with it's no surprise they didn't want her to stay. The public tweeting about it doesn't inspire much confidence either. https://slatestarcodex.com/2014/02/23/in-favor-of-niceness-community-and-civilization/ https://slatestarcodex.com/2014/02/23/in-favor-of-niceness-c...

joshuamorton 6y ago
> Whatever your position, Yann engages on substance, and Timnit is obnoxious: For what it's worth, I and many others disagree with this characterization. I find Yann comes across as incredibly condescending and holier than thou in their interactions. Nor does Yann engage on substance. He refuses to take the time engage with, or even acknowledge that he has read, the relevant academic literature (which Timnit repeatedly cites).
- fossuser 6y ago
  People can read the thread for themselves and decide. I see a quote tweet from Timnit with "I'm sick of this framing...listen to us", then misquoting what he said. Ignoring his replies and then following up with "I'm disengaging for my sanity...not worth my time...Maybe your colleagues will try to educate you..." etc. She attacks him (so he replies) and then she ignores him and talks down to him. I don't have a dog in this fight, I'm just an outside person reading this - I suspect most people reading that thread would think Timnit's tweets are obnoxious. Imagine if the people were switched. I wouldn't want to work with someone who argues that way when they disagree.
  - joshuamorton 6y ago
    Yes, you've made your position clear. I'm simply asking that you acknowledge that not everyone agrees with you, instead of making sweeping statements that no matter your opinion, Timnit was "obnoxious". You have your view of the events, I'm not trying to convince you to change it. I'm simply saying that other people disagree. No need to continue to try and justify yourself.
    - fossuser 6y ago
      Of course - there will almost always be some amount of people that disagree with any position. That doesn’t make all positions equally valid. Stating that others disagree seems like a banality? Obviously this is the case, just look at this thread and Twitter. I just think they’re wrong. I think attempting to explain why I think the way I do is kind of the point of the discussion. If I can’t justify it then I’d want to change my mind.
    - dash2 6y ago
      I think the quotes given are persuasive evidence, though. “I’m disengaging for my sanity”?
  - chrisdirkis 6y ago
    Not to get too heated or anything, but the framing of "People can read the thread for themselves and decide." concerns me. Saying "I think A", then responding to people who say "I think ~A" with "hey hey hey, let's let people decide themselves" is pretty stifling. I don't believe that was your intent, but that's one way it reads. I appreciate that you've explained your reasoning for your position, though.
- dekhn 6y ago
  I guess the way I think about it is this: Yann has a long history in ML. He's probably had to deal with bias problems for decades. Probably pretty experienced with it. Now he's heading up some Facebook ML stuff and on a daily basis he watches hundreds to thousands of engineers work on systems that process and learn from billions of users. I feel like after you do that for a while, you gain enough wisdom and experience to deserve to be engaged with respect and thoughtfulness. She has repeatedly engaged with bad faith, misleading interpretations of intent, and is just sort of really "attacky". Sure, he's a bit condescending (I've seen the same thing and it annoyed me for a bit, then I kind of read about what he's done and realized: he's got tons of experience and data about this and works with it at scale constantly.
  - joshuamorton 6y ago
    My understanding is that this is not the first time they engaged on this type of topic, and Yann has a history of ignoring other people who brought up similar criticisms to him (at conferences, etc.) At some point you lose the assumption of good faith, and deserve to be called out for refusing to learn. For what it's worth, I'm well aware of who Yann is, and was at the time as well. That doesn't make him immune to being wrong. (Nor, by the way, do I see any bad faith in her initial tweet. I see exasperation, but not bad faith).
    - rndgermandude 6y ago
      I lost the assumption of good faith already in her first tweet, in particular >You can’t just reduce harms caused by ML to dataset bias. She's already attacking a strawman right there. Yann did not deny any harms caused by ML.
      - joshuamorton 6y ago
        Nor did Timnit claim that he was. Her disagreement was about the causes of harms, not the existence of resulting harms.
        6y ago
BlueTemplar 6y ago
Can someone explain to me why people are still taking tweets seriously?

joshuamorton 6y ago

> Whatever your position, Yann engages on substance, and Timnit is obnoxious: For what it's worth, I and many others disagree with this characterization. I find Yann comes across as incredibly condescending and holier than thou in their interactions. Nor does Yann engage on substance. He refuses to take the time engage with, or even acknowledge that he has read, the relevant academic literature (which Timnit repeatedly cites).

fossuser 6y ago
People can read the thread for themselves and decide. I see a quote tweet from Timnit with "I'm sick of this framing...listen to us", then misquoting what he said. Ignoring his replies and then following up with "I'm disengaging for my sanity...not worth my time...Maybe your colleagues will try to educate you..." etc. She attacks him (so he replies) and then she ignores him and talks down to him. I don't have a dog in this fight, I'm just an outside person reading this - I suspect most people reading that thread would think Timnit's tweets are obnoxious. Imagine if the people were switched. I wouldn't want to work with someone who argues that way when they disagree.
- joshuamorton 6y ago
  Yes, you've made your position clear. I'm simply asking that you acknowledge that not everyone agrees with you, instead of making sweeping statements that no matter your opinion, Timnit was "obnoxious". You have your view of the events, I'm not trying to convince you to change it. I'm simply saying that other people disagree. No need to continue to try and justify yourself.
  - fossuser 6y ago
    Of course - there will almost always be some amount of people that disagree with any position. That doesn’t make all positions equally valid. Stating that others disagree seems like a banality? Obviously this is the case, just look at this thread and Twitter. I just think they’re wrong. I think attempting to explain why I think the way I do is kind of the point of the discussion. If I can’t justify it then I’d want to change my mind.
  - dash2 6y ago
    I think the quotes given are persuasive evidence, though. “I’m disengaging for my sanity”?
- chrisdirkis 6y ago
  Not to get too heated or anything, but the framing of "People can read the thread for themselves and decide." concerns me. Saying "I think A", then responding to people who say "I think ~A" with "hey hey hey, let's let people decide themselves" is pretty stifling. I don't believe that was your intent, but that's one way it reads. I appreciate that you've explained your reasoning for your position, though.
dekhn 6y ago
I guess the way I think about it is this: Yann has a long history in ML. He's probably had to deal with bias problems for decades. Probably pretty experienced with it. Now he's heading up some Facebook ML stuff and on a daily basis he watches hundreds to thousands of engineers work on systems that process and learn from billions of users. I feel like after you do that for a while, you gain enough wisdom and experience to deserve to be engaged with respect and thoughtfulness. She has repeatedly engaged with bad faith, misleading interpretations of intent, and is just sort of really "attacky". Sure, he's a bit condescending (I've seen the same thing and it annoyed me for a bit, then I kind of read about what he's done and realized: he's got tons of experience and data about this and works with it at scale constantly.
- joshuamorton 6y ago
  My understanding is that this is not the first time they engaged on this type of topic, and Yann has a history of ignoring other people who brought up similar criticisms to him (at conferences, etc.) At some point you lose the assumption of good faith, and deserve to be called out for refusing to learn. For what it's worth, I'm well aware of who Yann is, and was at the time as well. That doesn't make him immune to being wrong. (Nor, by the way, do I see any bad faith in her initial tweet. I see exasperation, but not bad faith).
  - rndgermandude 6y ago
    I lost the assumption of good faith already in her first tweet, in particular >You can’t just reduce harms caused by ML to dataset bias. She's already attacking a strawman right there. Yann did not deny any harms caused by ML.
    - joshuamorton 6y ago
      Nor did Timnit claim that he was. Her disagreement was about the causes of harms, not the existence of resulting harms.
      - 6y ago

BlueTemplar 6y ago

Can someone explain to me why people are still taking tweets seriously?