On managing outrage in Silicon Valley • Hacker News Board

Re: On managing outrage in Silicon Valley

#21

Post by JoshTriplett » Mon, Aug 07, 2017, 5:45 PM UTC

> He is one individual in a company that employs more than 72,000 people. Why has Silicon Valley spent the weekend talking about him

Because we're not talking about a memo posted by one random engineer that got the reaction it deserved for declaring a large fraction of his co-workers sub-standard engineers (among the myriad broken things in that memo). That would have been a story for all of five minutes.

Instead, we're talking about how a large fraction of a major tech company quickly and enthusiastically endorsed it and circulated it.

"Hey, finally someone says it ought to be OK for me to denigrate my co-workers, treat them as sub-standard engineers and sub-standard humans, and propagate junk science to prop up my prejudice! I feel validated!"

That this is even remotely a popular sentiment, rather than something that gets you treated like you just said "the earth is flat", is the story here.

Re: On managing outrage in Silicon Valley

#22

Post by eiriklv » Mon, Aug 07, 2017, 5:46 PM UTC

pnathan wrote: post #12

What happens when the lone voice is in the right, and the mass of people are in the wrong, and all of the preponderance of current science and wisdom is against the lone voice? It's no great stretch to find examples through history of this in different social contexts.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ignaz_Semmelweis

Re: On managing outrage in Silicon Valley

#23

Post by Ilurkyeahsowat » Mon, Aug 07, 2017, 5:46 PM UTC

snerbles wrote: post #11

Quarrelsome wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But is it okay to campaign towards the goal of firing someone for expressing an opinion they feel outraged about?

To some, the mere expression of an outrageous opinion is a form of violence in and of itself. Following this logic, any who express such ideas to others should be sanctioned as if they committed physical violence.

What makes something outrageous though? Physical violence is fairly cut and dry in definition, "outrageous" is completely subjective. For example, my grandmother, like some older people, will not talk about menstration. She believes it is completely outrageous that anyone would discuss this publically. Would it then be fair to say that discussions surrounding menstration are as bad as physical violence towards my grandmother?

Re: On managing outrage in Silicon Valley

#24

Post by s73ver » Mon, Aug 07, 2017, 5:46 PM UTC

fireflash38 wrote: post #4

whipoodle wrote: post #2

Maybe it's okay for people to be outraged about some things.

Sure is! People can be offended all they want. Where things get really iffy is when they want 'justice'. It often means that they try to get that person fired or lambasted in front of their peers. I don't see how that's at all constructive, let alone 'justice'. At the very least, it leads to even more divisiveness, instead of rational discussion. As a thought experiment: have you ever seen someone change their mind o…

As a thought experiment: have you ever seen a team work well together when one of the members has publically said that half of their team doesn't deserve to be there and shouldn't have been hired in the first place?

Re: On managing outrage in Silicon Valley

#25

Post by untog » Mon, Aug 07, 2017, 5:46 PM UTC

fireflash38 wrote: post #4

whipoodle wrote: post #2

Maybe it's okay for people to be outraged about some things.

Sure is! People can be offended all they want. Where things get really iffy is when they want 'justice'. It often means that they try to get that person fired or lambasted in front of their peers. I don't see how that's at all constructive, let alone 'justice'. At the very least, it leads to even more divisiveness, instead of rational discussion. As a thought experiment: have you ever seen someone change their mind o…

> As a thought experiment: have you ever seen someone change their mind or worldview as a result of being insulted & fired?

...but that's not why someone in this position would be fired. It would be because their publicly stated opinions about what people are and are not capable of makes their co-workers deeply uncomfortable.

We can debate endlessly (we already have, I'm sure we will again) whether firing is the right or wrong choice, but let's argue about it for the right reasons.

Re: On managing outrage in Silicon Valley

#26

Post by JoshTriplett » Mon, Aug 07, 2017, 5:46 PM UTC

pnathan wrote: post #12

What happens when the lone voice is in the right, and the mass of people are in the wrong, and all of the preponderance of current science and wisdom is against the lone voice? It's no great stretch to find examples through history of this in different social contexts.

> What happens when the lone voice is in the right, and the mass of people are in the wrong, and all of the preponderance of current science and wisdom is against the lone voice?

Unless you're trying to endorse that memo, perhaps you should save this comment for when that actually happens.

Re: On managing outrage in Silicon Valley

#27

Post by kristianc » Mon, Aug 07, 2017, 5:47 PM UTC

The major elephant in the room here, which the memo doesn't seem to address, is that as late as the 1960's, computer programming was seen as a natural career for young women. Has biology changed that much in the last fifty years?

Re: On managing outrage in Silicon Valley

#28

Post by jerrylives » Mon, Aug 07, 2017, 5:47 PM UTC

eiriklv wrote: post #22

pnathan wrote: post #12

What happens when the lone voice is in the right, and the mass of people are in the wrong, and all of the preponderance of current science and wisdom is against the lone voice? It's no great stretch to find examples through history of this in different social contexts.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ignaz_Semmelweis

These two instances are not at all remotely comparable lol

Re: On managing outrage in Silicon Valley

#29

Post by JoshTriplett » Mon, Aug 07, 2017, 5:47 PM UTC

fireflash38 wrote: post #4

whipoodle wrote: post #2

Maybe it's okay for people to be outraged about some things.

Sure is! People can be offended all they want. Where things get really iffy is when they want 'justice'. It often means that they try to get that person fired or lambasted in front of their peers. I don't see how that's at all constructive, let alone 'justice'. At the very least, it leads to even more divisiveness, instead of rational discussion. As a thought experiment: have you ever seen someone change their mind o…

> As a thought experiment: have you ever seen someone change their mind or worldview as a result of being insulted & fired?

It's fundamentally not about them; it's about their co-workers. Making it about them is the wrong approach.

Re: On managing outrage in Silicon Valley

#30

Post by dionidium » Mon, Aug 07, 2017, 5:48 PM UTC

sbierwagen wrote: post #8

It's interesting to note that the only reason this is a news story is because "a Google engineer" wrote it. If the essay had been published entirely anonymously, then it would have attracted no attention at all, like a dozen similar essays. The story is the source, not the content.

It's only interesting because it was said in a context where you're not allowed to say it. This is a mainstream debate that has been undertaken without much controversy by mainstream social scientists.

See, for example, this debate between Steven Pinker and Elizabeth Spelke:

Steven Pinker & Elizabeth Spelke | The Science of Gender & Science | Mind Brain Behavior Discussion

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Hb3oe7-PJ8