It’s alarming that NeurIPS papers are being rejected based on ‘ethics reviews,'” he tweeted last week. “How do we guard against ideological biases in such reviews? Since when are scientific conferences in the business of policing the perceived ethics of technical papers?”
His opinion drew a number of responses from other top data scientists and those involved with NeurIPS.
“The problem here is that folks like him lack the humility to admit that they do not have skills in qualitative work and dismiss it all as a ‘slippery slope,'” tweeted Rumman Chowdhury, founder of Parity and former global lead for Responsible AI at Accenture Applied Intelligence. “Qualitative methods have rigor. Ethical assessment can be generalizable and sustainable.”
The discourse on Twitter then shifted to last year’s decision to rename what can you do with a computer science degree. There were concerns over the previous name NIPS due to racial slurs and sexism.
No comments:
Post a Comment