Taking Gebru's word seriously here is reason to discount the entire argument.
Gebru is a part of a clique that is devoted to an entirely different set of ideas around AI Safety.
The two basic movements here are:
1. Be very scared of AI development, then do capabilities research but feel bad about it.
2. Demand AI research comes with locks in them that make sure the AI can't write a tweet that would make a San Franciscan Activist uncomfortable. Achieve very little in terms of manipulating AI, but get lots of book deals.
Neither of these groups should really be trusted for hard data about the other, and more importantly - missing that piece indicates that the author is not even attempting to convince the unconvinced.
Gebru is a part of a clique that is devoted to an entirely different set of ideas around AI Safety.
The two basic movements here are: 1. Be very scared of AI development, then do capabilities research but feel bad about it. 2. Demand AI research comes with locks in them that make sure the AI can't write a tweet that would make a San Franciscan Activist uncomfortable. Achieve very little in terms of manipulating AI, but get lots of book deals.
Neither of these groups should really be trusted for hard data about the other, and more importantly - missing that piece indicates that the author is not even attempting to convince the unconvinced.