Have you seen or read her toxic behavior online?
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
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."
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
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.
2. Do you really think lecun wouldn’t have left Twitter if he didn’t find that conversation enjoyable? Do you discount the many other people who found her interactions with lecun horrible? Did any of the other people behave as arrogantly towards lecun as she did? Again, no point made.
3. See 1
4. See 1
So, you can either stop ignoring the fact that her own behavior led to this, or you can continue to think many other respected people in the industry who act way more professionally than her are just against her because they don’t support her views or think google is racist.
You are the only person postulating the intention of her firing. I am merely calling out your assumptions because the consensus from the entire community involved has declared otherwise.
Most other people who found her refutations horrible are outsiders who don’t fully grasp the topic LeCun and Gebru and everyone else was alluding to.
Who are the respected in the industry that are against her? Not even LeCun, who has said he thinks her work is important. Nothing in your post has facts at all.
You dont have to grasp a topic to know if someone is debating respectfully. I dont have to be a doctor to know that the person is an asshole if they act like an asshole towards me.
I think lets just agree to disagree. Focus on the behavior. Not what she is writing about in her papers. And imaging someone acted like that towards you in a workplace. Imagine you are a CEO or a manager and someone comes to you and says 'Do x y or z otherwise im leaving'. Id be like wtf, sure, if thats how you deal with disagreements, cya'. Everyone is replaceable especially toxic people.
How can you objectively comment on her behavior if you have never interacted with the person ever?
This has been discussed in prior threads. A manager is well within his rights to act upon his decisions emotionally. Employees are well within their rights to express concern. If I work in a workplace with severe safety issues, I would most definitely demand an ultimatum for my personal occupational security. Managers DO NOT impulsively fire individuals unless they are mentally unable to navigate through a conflict. It's far more nuanced than that.