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

Note to Google Employees from CEO Sundar Pichai

blog.google

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 423 posts

Re: Note to Google Employees from CEO Sundar Pichai

#61

Post by oddlyaromatic »

CodeWriter23 wrote: post #25
Sir_Cmpwn wrote: post #18

Wow, I'm surprised to see the comments here being hateful towards this statement. I don't think it's contradictory at all. The stance he takes is that any subject is up for debate, so long as you don't step out of line with respect to the code of conduct. The guy who was fired was way out of line, far beyond any reasonable limits to topics of discussion. Even as a particularly opinionated person myself, who would be…

Not saying Google has to uphold everyone's 1A rights. Not saying dude who wrote the essay is correct either. But it's a lie to say Google's culture supports free speech when the cost of that speech is compliance with the tyranny of a Code of Conduct.

>But it's a lie to say Google's culture supports free speech when the cost of that speech is compliance with the tyranny of a Code of Conduct.

I think people often expect 'free speech' in situations where I wouldn't. Like a collaborative working environment where you are all professionals trying to get work done. There is a subset of speech (so no longer 'free') that is appropriate for working professionally with a group, especially a group from widely diverse backgrounds. The exact boundaries change over time and between environments, but the idea of employers setting a baseline set of elections expectations inherently limits speech. Google supports speech within limits, and a person who gets that could probably have navigated the politics of talking about the legitimate issues in the memo without crossing that line. Working together in companies is weird. Codes of Conduct attempt to standardize expectations so that work can get done. Work is a special place.

Re: Note to Google Employees from CEO Sundar Pichai

#62

Post by cdubzzz »

ai_ja_nai wrote: post #57
cdubzzz wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A strong message about breaking the code of conduct, yes. The message here seems abundantly clear and I have trouble understanding how it can miscontrued to be anything other than reacting to a clear violation. I can't even think of how to restate what is so clearly laid out in the note. I wouldn't rule out the potential that there is uneven enforcement of such violations, and that would make this action look questio…

Banning free speech is unconstitutional. Any "Code of Conduct" or other self proclaiming binding clauses on your contract that try to go against your constitutional rights should be void.

Banning free speech is absolutely not unconstitutional. I think the Wikipedia article[0] sums it up best (emphasis mine): In the United States, freedom of speech and expression is strongly protected from government restrictions by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, many state constitutions, and state and federal laws.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_speech_in_the_Unite...

Re: Note to Google Employees from CEO Sundar Pichai

#63

Post by zaptheimpaler »

cdubzzz wrote: post #24
lagadu wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By firing the employee they're effectively sending out a strong message about it no matter how they sugarcoat it.

A strong message about breaking the code of conduct, yes. The message here seems abundantly clear and I have trouble understanding how it can miscontrued to be anything other than reacting to a clear violation. I can't even think of how to restate what is so clearly laid out in the note. I wouldn't rule out the potential that there is uneven enforcement of such violations, and that would make this action look questio…

This is some ridiculous shit right here.

When a murderer is sentenced for murder... there are 2 levels of understanding the sentencing. One is that he broke the "code of conduct"/law, the deeper is why we consider that to be unlawful (societal harm).

Saying he clearly broke the code of conduct just shifts the question to how useful the code of conduct is.. its not some fucking holy unbreakable scripture from the sky, its man made, just as the firing is.

Re: Note to Google Employees from CEO Sundar Pichai

#64

Post by Pyxl101 »

oddlyaromatic wrote: post #40
naturalgradient wrote: post #7

There is just no winning in the following chain of arguments: - We can debate anything - However, some views are too harmful to be debated - Whoever is most vocally outraged decides the boundary between open to debate/too harmful

The memo itself was incoherent. Many of its statements made sense for debate, and the author himself pointed out that you can't tell much about any individual from the general data, which I think has not been focused on enough. He seemed to think he was doing everybody a service and that his views were not detrimental to anybody. But the actual choices in how to express the generalities showed really bad judgement an…

Have you read the memo? It's coherent. People just don't like what it says. Please read this article which includes responses to the memo from four scientists who study the subject matter: http://archive.is/z6xxP

> The author of the Google essay on issues related to diversity gets nearly all of the science and its implications exactly right. [...] This essay may not get everything 100% right, but it is certainly not a rant. And it stands in sharp contrast to most of the comments, which are little more than snarky modern slurs. The arrogance of most of the comments reflects exactly the type of smug self-appointed superiority that has led to widespread resentment of the left among reasonable people. To the extent that such views correspond to those at Google, they vindicate the essayist’s claims about the authoritarian and repressive atmosphere there. Even the response by Google’s new VP in charge of diversity simply ignores all of the author’s arguments, and vacuously affirms Google’s commitment to diversity. The essay is vastly more thoughtful, linked to the science, and well-reasoned than nearly all of the comments. (Lee Jussim, professor of social psychology at Rutgers University)

> For what it’s worth, I think that almost all of the Google memo’s empirical claims are scientifically accurate. Moreover, they are stated quite carefully and dispassionately. Its key claims about sex differences are especially well-supported by large volumes of research across species, cultures, and history. I know a little about sex differences research. On the topic of evolution and human sexuality, I’ve taught for 28 years, written 4 books and over 100 academic publications, given 190 talks, reviewed papers for over 50 journals, and mentored 11 Ph.D. students. Whoever the memo’s author is, he has obviously read a fair amount about these topics. Graded fairly, his memo would get at least an A- in any masters’ level psychology course. It is consistent with the scientific state of the art on sex differences. (Blank slate gender feminism is advocacy rather than science: no gender feminist I’ve met has ever been able to give a coherent answer to the question ‘What empirical findings would convince you that psychological sex differences evolved?’) (Geoffrey Miller, evolutionary psychology professor at University of New Mexico)

If you have read the memo and found it incoherent, then please explain what part of it is incoherent. Here are some of the points made in its summary:

> [S]ilencing [people who disagree] has created an ideological echo chamber where some ideas are too sacred to be honestly discussed.

> Differences in distributions of traits between men and women may in part explain why we don’t have 50% representation of women in tech and leadership. Discrimination to reach equal representation is unfair, divisive, and bad for business.

Do you find those points incoherent? I find them to be clear. ("incoherent: expressed in an incomprehensible or confusing way; unclear.")

Re: Note to Google Employees from CEO Sundar Pichai

#65

Post by hidden-markov »

k-mcgrady wrote: post #28

This thread seems to be a perfect demonstration of the problems when it comes to diversity in tech. People just don't seem to get it. I see the same thing in threads around big SV names sexually harassing women (and in those cases it blows my mind even more that people don't get that it's a problem). It seems like a lot of people are basing their opinions on logic (fine) but in a perfect world where everyone has equa…

This thread feels like a Breitbart comment section.

Re: Note to Google Employees from CEO Sundar Pichai

#66

Post by tnone »

ck425 wrote: post #43
CodeWriter23 wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No. He's all but saying it. Mincing words may give a free pass in your book. Not in mine.

He explicitly says near the start of his article that he disagrees with the views on gender differences that the memo espouces, and that he's not getting into then because others are more qualified to do so.

Good thing the original memo author has a PhD in biology then.

That post is a cowardly and smarmy non answer, and it contradicts itself in several ways. Aside from the one already mentioned, it claims making people feel bad at their job is inappropriate (even though the memo did no such thing) and then goes on to actually mock the author by claiming he sounds like he's bad at his job.

Rules for thee but not for me. Utterly pathetic how people think this is in any way a rebuttal.

Re: Note to Google Employees from CEO Sundar Pichai

#67

Post by humanrebar »

Swizec wrote: post #52
k-mcgrady wrote: post #28

This thread seems to be a perfect demonstration of the problems when it comes to diversity in tech. People just don't seem to get it. I see the same thing in threads around big SV names sexually harassing women (and in those cases it blows my mind even more that people don't get that it's a problem). It seems like a lot of people are basing their opinions on logic (fine) but in a perfect world where everyone has equa…

My favorite explanation of this effect goes like this: You have students in a classroom, sitting in 5 rows of 5 students. The teacher gives each student a crumpled ball of paper. Each ball is identical. The teacher then places a bin at the very front of the class and says "Okay, you each get one throw from your seat. If you hit the bin, you get an A" Equal opportunity. Everyone is throwing the same ball into the same…

> But some students are 5ft away and others are 30ft away. Suddenly not so fair.

Employers don't know who came from privileged backgrounds and who didn't. Legally, they shouldn't even be asking about it.

The concern isn't about whether employers should help people out. The concern is that the current rubric is too inexact. And that questioning the rubric is considered hateful.

Re: Note to Google Employees from CEO Sundar Pichai

#68

Post by eeks »

se2 wrote: post #10
koolba wrote: post #5

Quoting Sundar Pichai (Google CEO), emphasis mine: > At the same time, there are co-workers who are questioning whether they can safely express their views in the workplace (especially those with a minority viewpoint) . They too feel under threat, and that is also not OK. People must feel free to express dissent. So to be clear again, many points raised in the memo—such as the portions criticizing Google’s trainings,…

I believe you have misconstrued the message Sundar was giving. The difference between having the freedom to speak one's mind, and breaching a code of conduct that you sign when you agree to work for Google is clear cut in his note.

You cannot pose as a parangon of free speech when your company just fired a dissenting voice.

For all intents and purposes the content of the memo was balanced, polite, and restricted to the Google audience. The adult reaction should have been to punish the leaker (which I believe should be an actual breach of the code of conduct) and organize internal debates to allow multiple viewpoints to confront.

Rallying with the hysterical mass and shutting down the minority voice is certainly not about supporting debates and free speech. It's about throwing red meat to the wolves so the company can quietly solve its all too real gender pay gap issues without making too much PR waves.

Re: Note to Google Employees from CEO Sundar Pichai

#69

Post by cdubzzz »

visarga wrote: post #45
cdubzzz wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A strong message about breaking the code of conduct, yes. The message here seems abundantly clear and I have trouble understanding how it can miscontrued to be anything other than reacting to a clear violation. I can't even think of how to restate what is so clearly laid out in the note. I wouldn't rule out the potential that there is uneven enforcement of such violations, and that would make this action look questio…

When calling it a "code of conduct" does it refer to concrete actions, or just expressing opinions? Other than speech, what was the violation here? Restricting free speech by threat of firing is the solution everyone is applauding? Apparently Google is declaring an attitude in opposition to what they did: "many points raised in the memo ... are important topics. The author had a right to express their views on those…

Speech is action and just as capable of breaking any rule or code as physical action. Free speech is also not really relevant here as it has to do with the government's inability to restrict speech.

I think it is certainly a very fine line to walk and people (including Google employees) will definitely see it in a lot of different ways. But, reading this as an outsider, the note appears to me to address the situation very directly and conveys a real sense of urgency (more so than I have ever seen from any of my employers, at least).

Re: Note to Google Employees from CEO Sundar Pichai

#70

Post by oddlyaromatic »

humanrebar wrote: post #58
oddlyaromatic wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The memo itself was incoherent. Many of its statements made sense for debate, and the author himself pointed out that you can't tell much about any individual from the general data, which I think has not been focused on enough. He seemed to think he was doing everybody a service and that his views were not detrimental to anybody. But the actual choices in how to express the generalities showed really bad judgement an…

> An incoherent companywide memo is not the best way to start a debate on a sensitive topic. What is the best way?

Perhaps get a little feedback from somebody likely to be affected by it, or HR, before blasting it to the whole company? That's a better way. Separating out the legitimate issues from the speculation about potential reasons (which to me is where most of the nonsense lies) would have been a better way. And unless the internal memo system is the only way to communicate within Google, he probably had other options to pilot this piece without burning bridges. Like to his supervisor say "hey, I want to send out this memo, do you think I'll catch some flak or is it fine?" I'm not, by the way, actually saying I know the best way. Just that, to me, there seem to be many obvious better ways.
Post reply on HN