DavidSumpter

4 ms·

1. 1.▲
   by DavidSumpter 6y ago

   But when you write something like this, do you also understand that their actual research is widely considered to be of a high quality and very important? So if you agree that ethics is important, would you leave them off a top 10 list (and
2. 2.▲
   by DavidSumpter 6y ago

   It is a valid criticism that the headline is clickbaity.
3. 3.▲
   by DavidSumpter 6y ago

   It says the high point is 2017, not the last good paper. There are of course other good papers coming out go Google. But the novelty is dropping and the angst is increasing.
4. 4.▲
   by DavidSumpter 6y ago

   Ha ha *no agenda, I mean. ..... Maybe my subconscious has an agenda I don't know about :-)
5. 5.▲
   by DavidSumpter 6y ago

   More like they are using a hammer to put screw in the wall. But close enough :-)
6. 6.▲
   by DavidSumpter 6y ago

   Please read the article. I address some of the issues raised. My point is that Gebru's firing is symptomatic of some deep problems Google are experiencing. Thank you.
7. 7.▲
   by DavidSumpter 6y ago

   I am the author. I think it is interesting with this "axe to grind" response (there was another above). I am an independent researcher, a professor at a University. And I have absolutely no reason to be disappointed with Google. M
8. 8.▲
   by DavidSumpter 7y ago

   I am the professor who translated the article from Swedish. I agree that anyone can be a scientist. But, as you Erikson neither has qualifications, nor does he show understanding and nor does he use the scientific method. So very poor all r