Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

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

gizmodo.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 660 posts

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

#181

Post by didibus »

I hear a lot of complaints about conservative ideas being shunned and bullied, but I disagree completely. Why haven't I read a 10 page pro-diversity creed circulating at google?

I haven't heard or read about progressive ideas in a long time, a long long time.

I'd be willing to bet a pro diversity creed would get much stronger bullying against it too.

Anyways, I'm tired of this issue, and people trying to pretend there's an optimal truth. This is a human made field, if we wanted, we could change it. We just need to agree on what to optimize for, and there lies the problem, I don't think we know or care what we ultimately optimize for. Too me, it seems we're currently optimizing for the stock market. And until it's clear that women make a big impact on that, people will be cautious to fray too far from what's been tried and worked in the past.

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

#182

Post by jack9 »

Hnrobert42 wrote: post #16
Quarrelsome wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is bad with the good. The suggestion that men and women ARE different is taboo. The premise that the differences between them are social as opposed to literal is a much easier way to force the same point (and IMO more correct but I respect I lack the science to be certain). This person lacks tact and the way they view the entire political sphere as just left/right is ultimately of concern. Way too simplistic ou…

Yeah. I was willing to give him a fair hearing until he listed a handful of differences between men and women that he ascribes to biology without any factual support. And therein lies the unconscious bias against which he is railing. To him, there is no question that men and women, on average, are fundamentally different in ways that affects their ability to and interest in work in tech. I agree with him that folks s…

> I was willing to give him a fair hearing until he listed a handful of differences between men and women that he ascribes to biology without any factual support.

That's not exactly true. Jordan Peterson has quite a bit to say about science and the humanities, grounded quite heavily in science. The language is so similar to Peterson's lectures, I'm confident that it was crafted after a shallow dive into his Toronto/Harvard materials.

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

#183

Post by chocolateboy »

defen wrote: post #69
skywhopper wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who has lost their job for wrongthink?

Nobel Prize winner James Watson Nobel Prize winner Tim Hunt Harvard President Lawrence Summers are the three that immediately come to mind.

Several more are listed here: https://handleshaus.wordpress.com/2013/12/26/bullied-and-bad...

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

#184

Post by gsam »

AlexandrB wrote: post #158
DuskStar wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are actually a few studies showing gender differences in infants and monkeys. (males preferentially looking at/interacting with mechanical things, females faces/dolls) From that, you can assume that there are at least some biological differences in behavior between the sexes - and thus differing workplace representation is not necessarily 100% derived from social pressures. And if that's the case, achieving a 5…

> males preferentially looking at/interacting with mechanical things, females faces/dolls Then why are most politicians male? The problem with this line of reasoning is that it can be used to support almost any status quo because there's no obvious connecting line between childhood preference for "mechanical things" and STEM career preference later on. In particular, modern software development is highly collaborativ…

Because politicians require hyper-competitiveness to reach the top of the political hierarchy. Unfortunately most women would be considered far too agreeable, or conversely gender stereotypes portray females as being out-of-character (bossy) pursuing such cut-throat roles.

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

#185

Post by Kenji »

freyir wrote: post #67
Kenji wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If my boss told me I am expected to attend a "microaggression training" I would quit instantly. Oh wait - that wouldn't happen because I don't work at a libero-fascist place. I have no time for bullshit, I need to get stuff done.

You sound like a real high performer.

I am very lucky to be in an environment where pretty much everyone just wants to get stuff done. It's peaceful, barely any politics.

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

#187

Post by door »

devrandomguy wrote: post #170

How is it sexual?

straight men commenting on the attractiveness of women's bodies is pretty blatantly sexual. what other reason is there to make that kind of comment? "pure aesthetics"? like Wow Jessica from accounting's body is consistent with Greek Ideals about Archetypal Female Beauty. come on.

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

#188

Post by throwanem »

door wrote: post #178
throwanem wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sociology and anthropology being, of course, fields particularly noted for their peerless objectivity and rigor...

uh yeah i'd rather trust people who study society for a living for their opinions on social theory than some computer science major who has never taken a soft science class in his life

No doubt you would. Why should I? Because appeal to authority? Or is there a reason why their frequently regrettable track records must not be considered an indictment of any sort?

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

#189

Post by [deleted] »

mAdamTus wrote: post #68

He started out well, but about halfway through meandered into bullshit. Bad data, cherry picked data, incorrect incorrect understanding of the science, incorrect conclusions -- he even referenced the Cultural Marxism Conspiracy theory: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frankfurt_School#Cultural_Marx... By the time we hit "why we're blind" he's gone fully off the rails. I sympathize with him -- and even agree with several…

[deleted]

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

#190

Post by humanrebar »

golf1052 wrote: post #172
spaceseaman wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think your tone is a little smug but completely agree. To be frank I empathize with the writer of the article a bit. He worked very hard to achieve his position, and with that hard work comes a belief that the system he achieved in was inherently fair. It's difficult to call the situations we benefit from unfair - it's important for our self-worth that we value our accomplishments. But the key is that the author's…

I do agree with your initial comment but I would rather suggest that the author tries to look at the disadvantages that others have while reaching the same point that the author has. Yes, the author has done a lot to get to the position they're in but others in the face of racism or sexism have to work a hell of a lot more.

> ...others in the face of racism or sexism have to work a hell of a lot more.

That's not necessarily true. Everyone has a different story. For all you know, the author was an orphan, was wrongfully convicted of a felony, has a disability, and survived three kinds of cancer.

Post reply on HN