> She didn’t “refuse to fix it when asked”. She agreed with the proviso that she could have a meeting to figure out what she was and was not permitted to publis

> She didn’t “refuse to fix it when asked”. She agreed with the proviso that she could have a meeting to figure out what she was and was not permitted to publish. I think that is in dispute. Jeff Dean claims she did refuse to fix it. > It’s entirely plausible that the paper is bunk; however, when someone is willing to come down that hard to prevent an idea being published, I tend to err on the side of “worth finding out what” But they weren't trying to prevent the idea from being published. They certainly knew by firing her they'd give it far more attention than it would otherwise get. What they wanted was not to put their name on this idea.