This article leaves so many questions unanswered. The author wrote many words but didn’t seem to research the subject well. > Nor is it clear why her resistanc

This article leaves so many questions unanswered. The author wrote many words but didn’t seem to research the subject well. > Nor is it clear why her resistance—predictable as it was—prompted a snap decision to eject her, Filled with many quotes like this where Gebru’s “resistance” was not predictable as I don’t think anyone expected her to react the way she did. In that, if this happened to 10 people, I don’t think 5 would send out unprofessional listserv emails . > Dean repeated the point so often inside Google that some researchers joked that “I have an objection to Parrots section three” would be inscribed on his tombstone. The complaint made little sense to many AI researchers, who knew that grumbles about citations typically end with authors revising a paper, not getting terminated. I don’t think Jeff Dean’s email [0] was concerned with missing citations, but that the work did not address and reflect the work in those citations that were contrary to what the paper reported. The article does not understand or mischaracterizes the issues that are important to understanding this topic. [0] https://www.platformer.news/p/the-withering-email-that-got-an-ethical https://www.platformer.news/p/the-withering-email-that-got-a...