The Full 10-Page Anti-Diversity Screed Circulating Internally at Google • Hacker News Board

Re: The Full 10-Page Anti-Diversity Screed Circulating Internally at Google

#71

Post by renaudg » Sat, Aug 05, 2017, 10:32 PM UTC

grey-area wrote: post #43

factsaresacred wrote: post #5

I fail to understand the outrage but attribute that to the fact that few bothered to read the document before allowing themselves to be outraged by it - such is the shallow, feeling-fueled, hysteria-laden media cycle of today. The doc presents a point-of-view, grounded in reality. Furthermore it's not "anti-diversity", but rather anti-discrimination - specifically 'positive 'discrimination which it discredits while p…

I fail to understand the outrage but attribute that to the fact that few bothered to read Rather than assuming those who disagree with you are shallow and hysterical (a contentious word choice, given the subject), perhaps consider why others might be outraged, you could try some empathy (though I know the article warns us against empathy). The doc presents a point-of-view, grounded in reality. Furthermore it's not "a…

> I doubt the author has faced ostracism

Here's one of his colleagues threatening to quit "if HR does nothing in this case" : https://twitter.com/rakyll/status/893287112732291072

> here are some things that the author believes which are not true

You've left out "on average" (which is stated no less than 7 times in the document). It does seem to be all supported by research : https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/rabble-rouser/201707/wh...

Re: The Full 10-Page Anti-Diversity Screed Circulating Internally at Google

#72

Post by spaceseaman » Sat, Aug 05, 2017, 10:32 PM UTC

eintagsfiege wrote: post #35

rayiner wrote: post #19

The intellectual contortion required to get from the premise to the conclusion is actually quite impressive. > On average, men and women biologically differ in many ways. These differences aren’t just socially constructed because: > They’re universal across human cultures Except the gender ratio in science/engineering is anything but universal across cultures. 70% of science/engineering students in Iran are women: ht…

What do you know about women in CS in Iran? How many of them end up working in CS? I wouldn't jump to conclusions just because you find such outliers. Some weird mechanisms might be driving such numbers (like people not being given a choice what to study, people being forced to study something useful because they can't afford to study literature or gender studies for fun, women studying just to meet men to marry, men…

- you mean political and sociological forces that unnaturally perturb so called "natural trends"? If you claim Iran could potentially have such factors that encourage women to enter the field in "above-average" numbers, what allows you to wholesale eliminate similar factors when examining the situation within the borders of the United States that could cause women to enter the field in "below-average" numbers? What allows you to directly assume that one viewpoint is inherently more palatable besides your biased worldview?

Furthermore, your comment essentially only exists for you to cast doubt on the opposing viewpoint while bringing up common reactionary points of view that also have no evidence. You have no evidence that women in the United States "study literature or gender studies for fun" [1] or that "women just study something to meet men to marry". Not only are these ideas incredibly flawed, but you appear to have brought them up for no other reason that to further cast suspicion on the parent poster without actually addressing any of their claims. You just threw out ideas that people are likely to get up in a huff about.

[1] While I majored in CS in college, I also pursued a minor in critical theory. The people in that classroom were not taking those courses "for fun" any more than programmers took to their classes. They felt it was incredibly important to be able to dissect the immense amount of media we have in the world today and what it means. What are video games trying to say? Or modern films? What ideas do these share with bedrock pieces of literature that we've studied in critical theory again and again? Is it really so bad to enjoy that? Furthermore, gender studies is filled with people itching to try and discuss (and come to good conclusions about) THE VERY THINGS WE ARE ARGUING ABOUT RIGHT NOW. Isn't the fact that we spend so much time discussing such things nowadays evidence that it is a very real and important thing to study and discuss?

Re: The Full 10-Page Anti-Diversity Screed Circulating Internally at Google

#73

Post by swrobel » Sat, Aug 05, 2017, 10:32 PM UTC

LogicalBorg wrote: post #44

rayiner wrote: post #19

The intellectual contortion required to get from the premise to the conclusion is actually quite impressive. > On average, men and women biologically differ in many ways. These differences aren’t just socially constructed because: > They’re universal across human cultures Except the gender ratio in science/engineering is anything but universal across cultures. 70% of science/engineering students in Iran are women: ht…

> 70% of science/engineering students in Iran are women: The Forbes site you reference cites a Quora post, which quotes a Wikipedia article. What the Wikipedia article actually says is that 373,415 out of 1.5 million engineering students in Iran are women, which is 24.9%, not 70%. This is not that different from the 19-20% of engineering degrees awarded to women in the U.S.

But what does the Wikipedia article cite? It isn't a source itself...

Re: The Full 10-Page Anti-Diversity Screed Circulating Internally at Google

#74

Post by oddlyaromatic » Sat, Aug 05, 2017, 10:33 PM UTC

eintagsfiege wrote: post #35

rayiner wrote: post #19

The intellectual contortion required to get from the premise to the conclusion is actually quite impressive. > On average, men and women biologically differ in many ways. These differences aren’t just socially constructed because: > They’re universal across human cultures Except the gender ratio in science/engineering is anything but universal across cultures. 70% of science/engineering students in Iran are women: ht…

What do you know about women in CS in Iran? How many of them end up working in CS? I wouldn't jump to conclusions just because you find such outliers. Some weird mechanisms might be driving such numbers (like people not being given a choice what to study, people being forced to study something useful because they can't afford to study literature or gender studies for fun, women studying just to meet men to marry, men…

You make many assumptions here, on many different levels. Regarding parent's comment:

1. Iran was but one example of the uneven rates of participation in science. Of course there may be many interesting reasons for this. There are many reasons for most things.

2. Parent didn't actually jump to many conclusions as far as I can tell. You may be projecting. What conclusion did they make based on the 70%?

Finally, your list of factors that might influence the % of women studying science in Iran is weirdly general. Are those factors more prevalent in Iran than other places? Literature and gender studies are not alternatives to "useful" fields of study, they are useful. Culture matters. It's not just fun, it's hard and filled with contradictions and challenges. But you are right that it's not lucrative, and becoming less so. Maybe studying the arts is not so big in Iran as other countries and the sciences are more of a default choice?

Now maybe I'm the one projecting, but it feels like you want parent commenter to discount the 70% on the basis of some weak hypothetical guesswork about possible reasons to do so. This is how cognitive bias works. Answering the 70% question is interesting, and we should see what we can learn about it, and how that compares to our instincts.

Re: The Full 10-Page Anti-Diversity Screed Circulating Internally at Google

#75

Post by cbeach » Sat, Aug 05, 2017, 10:33 PM UTC

"Viewpoint diversity is arguably the most important type of diversity and political orientation is one of the most fundamental and significant ways in which people view things differently."

As an experiment, I'd like to see if HN upvotes or downvotes this statement from the memo.

I'm willing to put my karma score on the line to find out what HNers believe (this will help me decide if HN is a community worth investing further time in).

Re: The Full 10-Page Anti-Diversity Screed Circulating Internally at Google

#76

Post by bitlax » Sat, Aug 05, 2017, 10:34 PM UTC

anon0394678 wrote: post #30

ubernostrum wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well you see, brand-new account created to hide from those scary terrible lefties who'd obviously ruin you otherwise, the probability that the distribution we observe today matches the "natural" distribution is, how shall I put this, very low . Now you might ask how I know this, and the answer is simple: open society-wide legally-endorsed discrimination is a thing within living memory here in the US, and a thing that…

> Well you see, brand-new account created to hide from those scary terrible lefties who'd obviously ruin you otherwise I am not exactly hiding my intent here, so I am not sure what there is to gain from pointing out the obvious. And no, I do not think that there is someone out there hellbent on ruining my life. It's just a simple countermeasure against a low-probability, high-impact event. And real life conversations…

Post your LinkedIn or GTFO! /s

Re: The Full 10-Page Anti-Diversity Screed Circulating Internally at Google

#77

Post by remarkEon » Sat, Aug 05, 2017, 10:34 PM UTC

skywhopper wrote: post #57

davesque wrote: post #27

I don't really understand why this is getting so much attention. It's just some guy's opinion.

It's a toxic set of opinions that's unfortunately very representative of large numbers of white male tech employees. It's getting attention because it's useful to see laid out so clearly the biases, blatantly wrong assertions, and invalid logic such folks use to perpetuate the idea that "everything's fine in tech hiring".

Thanks for proving his point.

Re: The Full 10-Page Anti-Diversity Screed Circulating Internally at Google

#78

Post by twh270 » Sat, Aug 05, 2017, 10:34 PM UTC

santoshalper wrote: post #25

asploder wrote: post #7

It’s interesting that the author considers the conceptual framework of microaggressions spurious, while describing his negative experiences as a conservative Googler in terms of what a feminist might describe as microaggressions. To further undermine his own point, he asserts that several harms against conservatives have been caused by these microaggressions. The difference between effective negative feedback and har…

I noticed that as well. I find it interesting that the alt-right has started to embrace so much of modern feminist/liberal terminology and tacitly accepted so many of the premises. The modern alt-right conservative: "I don't believe in safe spaces, but please stop bullying me!"

This is incredibly disingenuous. Much of the left considers simple disagreement to be micro-aggression, while at the same time finding it perfectly acceptable to launch hate-filled screeds of animosity and hatred at anyone who doesn't toe the line, e.g. "You're a fucking animal that deserves to be put down!!"

Your comment implicitly supports this sort of misbehavior, implying that any complaint by an "alt-righter" is just whining and carries no legitimacy.

Both the far left and alt-right have adopted extremist positions and in general have nothing good to say about each other. Please don't legitimize hateful, unacceptable behavior from the left just because the alt-right has learned to play some of the same games.

Re: The Full 10-Page Anti-Diversity Screed Circulating Internally at Google

#79

Post by renaudg » Sat, Aug 05, 2017, 10:35 PM UTC

mcguire wrote: post #66

factsaresacred wrote: post #5

I fail to understand the outrage but attribute that to the fact that few bothered to read the document before allowing themselves to be outraged by it - such is the shallow, feeling-fueled, hysteria-laden media cycle of today. The doc presents a point-of-view, grounded in reality. Furthermore it's not "anti-diversity", but rather anti-discrimination - specifically 'positive 'discrimination which it discredits while p…

"Grounded in reality?" Could we get some sources for these claims? In particular, I'd like to see values and standard deviations for "On average, men and women biologically differ in many ways."

Here you go : https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/rabble-rouser/201707/wh...

Re: The Full 10-Page Anti-Diversity Screed Circulating Internally at Google

#80

Post by humanrebar » Sat, Aug 05, 2017, 10:35 PM UTC

rayiner wrote: post #19

The intellectual contortion required to get from the premise to the conclusion is actually quite impressive. > On average, men and women biologically differ in many ways. These differences aren’t just socially constructed because: > They’re universal across human cultures Except the gender ratio in science/engineering is anything but universal across cultures. 70% of science/engineering students in Iran are women: ht…

> The intellectual contortion required to get from the premise to the conclusion is actually quite impressive.

I read the whole thing differently than you did. What is the conclusion you are objecting to?