I understand the concern over Timnit’s resignation from Google. She’s done a great deal to move the field forward with her research. I wanted to share the email I sent to Google Research and some thoughts on our research process.https://docs.google.com/document/d/1f2kYWDXwhzYnq8ebVtuk9CqQqz7ScqxhSIxeYGrWjK0/edit?usp=sharing …
-
-
Replying to @JeffDean
I often heard from Googlers that pre-publishing "review" was primarily about preserving Google's intellectual property, and that they essentially had academic freedom. You're saying this isn't the case? If Timnit's paper was weak, why not trust academic review? Or just respond?
2 replies 6 retweets 252 likes -
I think the case is different here, when particular literature is not covered, the paper may still get accepted but it'll appear under Google's name without giving enough credit. Google seems to prevent this.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
If Google had given the names of the reviewers, who rejected her paper internally, this time she would possibly try to bash them on Twitter, as she tried to bash Jeff now.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
I see that you have no experience this (I've been interacting with Googlers publishing academically for more than a decade) but still have an opinion on what would have happened in your imagination. Never let facts get in the way of your future projections and carry on!
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.