[cepth]

The paper referenced ("Gender shades: Intersectional accuracy disparities in commercial gender classification") has been cited 1000+ times per her Google Scholar page (https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=lemnAcwAAAAJ). For a 2-year old paper, this is easily a top 1% most cited paper.

Take for example a retrospective look at 2017 NeurIPS papers done in 2019 (https://archive.is/wip/77YrB).

You can disagree with how she and/or Google has handled this whole situation, but please do not denigrate work that has been cited (https://scholar.google.com/scholar?oi=bibs&hl=en&cites=14954...) by papers accepted at the most competitive/prestigious ML conferences.

EDIT: I also do not see how in good faith you can say that VentureBeat, a company who makes the bulk of its revenue from running conferences catering to C-suite execs who can shell out thousands of dollars for a ticket, is "leftist".

[bzb6]

Are you really making the argument that people with money can’t be leftists? Do you know liberals are on average richer? https://www.cnbc.com/2019/09/19/economic-divide-in-the-us-is...

Most executives of tech and news companies would bend over backwards just to show how leftist they are in 2020.

(I’m only replying to the part of your comment that answers mine)

[jeromenerf]

"Left" and "right" carry little meaning when it comes to analyzing the divide between people. The "with/without money" bit is of a much higher order than the global "left/right" bit to me.

I don’t really care about the paper author’s fate, but it seems unsettling to me that she is discussed more than the paper itself.

[cepth]

In the United States, liberal and leftist are distinct terms.

Even someone like Ben Shapiro recognizes a difference between liberals and leftists (https://twitter.com/benshapiro/status/966081078166421504).

Silicon Valley types would hardly be described as leftists. Numerous studies have been done on the attitudes of Silicon Valley founders and execs (https://www.vox.com/2015/9/29/9411117/silicon-valley-politic...). The distinctions are dramatic.

We see that on average, tech founders are less likely to support vs. even Democrats generally (not just progressives):

* Banning the Keystone XL pipeline (60% vs 78%)

* The individual healthcare mandate (59% vs 70%)

* Labor unions being good (29% vs 73%)

This is to say, the average Silicon Valley type, particularly the C-suite exec or founder, tends not to be on the left wing of the Democratic party.

During the 2020 Democratic primary, even the Silicon Valley billionaires who are openly Democratic-leaning donated to candidates who were not to the left of the field (i.e. Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders) (https://www.cnbc.com/2019/08/13/2020-democratic-presidential...):

* Eric Schmidt -> Cory Booker and Joe Biden

* Reed Hastings -> Pete Buttigieg

* Marc Benioff -> Cory Booker, Kamala Harris, and Jay Inslee

* Reid Hoffman -> Cory Booker, Kirsten Gillibrand, Amy Klobuchar

* Jack Dorsey -> Andrew Yang, Tulsi Gabbard

* Ben Silbermann -> Pete Buttigieg

I'm engaging with you in good faith, and because I was intrigued that in a previous comment you mentioned that you live in Spain (though who's to say you're not a US ex-pat). But calling US tech companies "leftist" is a stretch at best.

[bzb6]

I see, they are the same thing to me, hence the confusion.