"There's not even one sentence in her email about what is actually the content of her paper that is so controversial"
From the Jeff Dean email it seems like the "cross-functional team" (read: includes people who are focused on company's bottom line, not the subject matter of the paper) wanted some sort of "fair balance" when discussing AI. He cites some examples.
Does this mean if we review papers on AI from Google employees that Google has approved for publication in the past, we will consistently find this balanced view.
They added Jeff's response later. I just read it. They thought the paper is missing important information and doesn't meet the bar. Fair point. That's why there's an internal review process. Her reaction was childish. She took it personally and emailed a rant to the Women list even though it has nothing to do with her being a woman, nor black. She also demanded to reveal the reviewers. (again it shows she is sure it was personal). All her public interactions so far show clearly what kind of person she is. She should join academia where she can publish whatever she wants. I'm sure she made a ton of money at Google and I wouldn't be surprised if she is going to milk more money from them via a lawsuit. She is a privileged woman.
From the Jeff Dean email it seems like the "cross-functional team" (read: includes people who are focused on company's bottom line, not the subject matter of the paper) wanted some sort of "fair balance" when discussing AI. He cites some examples.
Does this mean if we review papers on AI from Google employees that Google has approved for publication in the past, we will consistently find this balanced view.