4 ms·

Have you read her exchange with Lecun and the impact it had? Edit - Also, if her behavior online is like that, imagine what its like inside Google? Have you tho

Have you read her exchange with Lecun and the impact it had? Edit - Also, if her behavior online is like that, imagine what its like inside Google? Have you thought about that? Clearly her email to the brain group was an issue here, i wonder how it compared to her exchange with lecun? One final edit, even her co-authors were not ready for publishing the paper (per article), so why is the reason of censorship, supression etc even being discussed. This whole thing has been blown out of proportion and Google likely did the right thing, purely based on her behavior

lsiebert 6y ago
They were continuing to work on the paper for publication, which, if you've never written an academic paper, is a lengthy process. There's a heck of a difference between not being done and not wanting a rough draft circulating vs being asked to withdraw the paper entirely.
tmotwu 6y ago
Given that she seems relatively popular within Brain - more importantly her collaborators and direct manager, why should we assume she fostered a toxic work environment with those around her? More like, it appears the people who wanted her out were leadership and a set of anonymous PR/IP reviewers she does not know.
- mustuhfa 6y ago
  Her behavior is clear evidence of how she interacts with people. You can be a brilliant jerk and still get along with some people. In a team environment however, there is no place for this. Her exchange with Lecun, her threatening words and many of the way she puts forward her arguments. Even if she was in the right here, she can easily deal with it without doing what she did here. So yes, there is more evidence for her toxic behavior than there is for her ability deal with disagreements professionally and work in a team environment. TBH, I think this whole review things is just a reason for google letting her go. They were probably looking for a reason and she using her threatening (aka toxic) nature was just what google needed.
  - tmotwu 6y ago
    Again, I repeat, if her team had issues with her, her direct report would know and her team wouldn't be harping constant praise towards her. The people who removed her are executives several skips above her. That is unusual. You keep bringing up LeCun, but LeCun did not get harmed as you imagine - he only conceded to her point because she was frankly the expert in the topic of discussion and he finally acknowledged that.
    - mustuhfa 6y ago
      Can you link to your conclusions? Because thats not how I have seen it. She threatened to leave. If any of my team had an issue, and their response 'Do X, Y, X or ill leave', even if they are in the right, I would not align with them purely out of the fact that that is not the right behavior. You can still leave any company with out threats. Also we have not seen the email to the brain group. I wonder how that compared to her exchange with Lecun and her threatening nature. Lecun was not harmed? How did she contribute to a healthy debate there? Please also link me. Because all I saw were aggressive tones towards someone she disagreed with (even if she was in the right). Again, he behavior (not if she was right or not) is the problem here. You can be right, but still be an asshole. Also, how do you know some people in her team didnt have problems with her? Do you have here perf reports? I believe her direct manager is not the only person that can fire her. She can be ok good terms with her direct manager and still behave unacceptably towards higher ups
      - tmotwu 6y ago
        1. https://twitter.com/timnitGebru/status/1334877710477385728 https://twitter.com/timnitGebru/status/1334877710477385728 2. How was LeCun harmed? As far as I'm concerned, he accepted the feedback. And just so we're clear on what happened then - Gebru was only one of many with qualifications who were aggressively critical because of his abdication of research responsibilities. I don't know why you're so focused on Gebru in particular. 3. Yes, if this was about performance, her direct manager who oversees 300 people would know. 4. So yes, glad to see we agree higher ups, who she likely has little to no interaction with to supposedly be exhausted of her behaviors, stepped in to get rid of her.
lsiebert 6y ago
You mean when Lecun left Twitter explicitly saying people should stop critiquing Gebru? https://twitter.com/ylecun/status/1277372578231996424 https://twitter.com/ylecun/status/1277372578231996424 saying: "Following my posts of the last week, I'd like to ask everyone to please stop attacking each other via Twitter or other means. In particular, I'd like everyone to please stop attacking @timnitGebru and everyone who has been critical of my posts."
- mustuhfa 6y ago
  Was I pointing out what Lecun said or her specific way of handling that interaction? Its the latter thats toxic. If people were attacking Timnit for that interaction why is that? Clearly she did not handle that very well.
  - lsiebert 6y ago
    I think if she is to be judged on whether she was being toxic to Lecun or not, Lecun's opinion is relevant. Why do you feel it's not? And if his opinion isn't relevant, why should we care about yours? I also find your question about why people attacked her, as if people in the internet always have good reasons to attack others, is an incredibly silly attempt to appeal to the Bandwagon fallacy.
    - mustuhfa 6y ago
      Lecun is way more of a professional than her. He handled it the way it should be, do you think lecun is going to come out and say something other than what he did as a respected individual in the industry? Now go and look at how she has handled it and how she argued with Lecun. Then she also thratens people if she does not get her way. There is ample evidence for her behavior. Does she behave like this all the time? Of course probably not. But the fact that she is openly behaving like this is a clear data point. If you can not see this behavior as not suitable in a work environment, then lets hope we never work together.

lsiebert 6y ago

They were continuing to work on the paper for publication, which, if you've never written an academic paper, is a lengthy process. There's a heck of a difference between not being done and not wanting a rough draft circulating vs being asked to withdraw the paper entirely.

tmotwu 6y ago

Given that she seems relatively popular within Brain - more importantly her collaborators and direct manager, why should we assume she fostered a toxic work environment with those around her? More like, it appears the people who wanted her out were leadership and a set of anonymous PR/IP reviewers she does not know.

mustuhfa 6y ago
Her behavior is clear evidence of how she interacts with people. You can be a brilliant jerk and still get along with some people. In a team environment however, there is no place for this. Her exchange with Lecun, her threatening words and many of the way she puts forward her arguments. Even if she was in the right here, she can easily deal with it without doing what she did here. So yes, there is more evidence for her toxic behavior than there is for her ability deal with disagreements professionally and work in a team environment. TBH, I think this whole review things is just a reason for google letting her go. They were probably looking for a reason and she using her threatening (aka toxic) nature was just what google needed.
- tmotwu 6y ago
  Again, I repeat, if her team had issues with her, her direct report would know and her team wouldn't be harping constant praise towards her. The people who removed her are executives several skips above her. That is unusual. You keep bringing up LeCun, but LeCun did not get harmed as you imagine - he only conceded to her point because she was frankly the expert in the topic of discussion and he finally acknowledged that.
  - mustuhfa 6y ago
    Can you link to your conclusions? Because thats not how I have seen it. She threatened to leave. If any of my team had an issue, and their response 'Do X, Y, X or ill leave', even if they are in the right, I would not align with them purely out of the fact that that is not the right behavior. You can still leave any company with out threats. Also we have not seen the email to the brain group. I wonder how that compared to her exchange with Lecun and her threatening nature. Lecun was not harmed? How did she contribute to a healthy debate there? Please also link me. Because all I saw were aggressive tones towards someone she disagreed with (even if she was in the right). Again, he behavior (not if she was right or not) is the problem here. You can be right, but still be an asshole. Also, how do you know some people in her team didnt have problems with her? Do you have here perf reports? I believe her direct manager is not the only person that can fire her. She can be ok good terms with her direct manager and still behave unacceptably towards higher ups
    - tmotwu 6y ago
      1. https://twitter.com/timnitGebru/status/1334877710477385728 https://twitter.com/timnitGebru/status/1334877710477385728 2. How was LeCun harmed? As far as I'm concerned, he accepted the feedback. And just so we're clear on what happened then - Gebru was only one of many with qualifications who were aggressively critical because of his abdication of research responsibilities. I don't know why you're so focused on Gebru in particular. 3. Yes, if this was about performance, her direct manager who oversees 300 people would know. 4. So yes, glad to see we agree higher ups, who she likely has little to no interaction with to supposedly be exhausted of her behaviors, stepped in to get rid of her.

lsiebert 6y ago

You mean when Lecun left Twitter explicitly saying people should stop critiquing Gebru? https://twitter.com/ylecun/status/1277372578231996424 https://twitter.com/ylecun/status/1277372578231996424 saying: "Following my posts of the last week, I'd like to ask everyone to please stop attacking each other via Twitter or other means. In particular, I'd like everyone to please stop attacking @timnitGebru and everyone who has been critical of my posts."

mustuhfa 6y ago
Was I pointing out what Lecun said or her specific way of handling that interaction? Its the latter thats toxic. If people were attacking Timnit for that interaction why is that? Clearly she did not handle that very well.
- lsiebert 6y ago
  I think if she is to be judged on whether she was being toxic to Lecun or not, Lecun's opinion is relevant. Why do you feel it's not? And if his opinion isn't relevant, why should we care about yours? I also find your question about why people attacked her, as if people in the internet always have good reasons to attack others, is an incredibly silly attempt to appeal to the Bandwagon fallacy.
  - mustuhfa 6y ago
    Lecun is way more of a professional than her. He handled it the way it should be, do you think lecun is going to come out and say something other than what he did as a respected individual in the industry? Now go and look at how she has handled it and how she argued with Lecun. Then she also thratens people if she does not get her way. There is ample evidence for her behavior. Does she behave like this all the time? Of course probably not. But the fact that she is openly behaving like this is a clear data point. If you can not see this behavior as not suitable in a work environment, then lets hope we never work together.