Note to Google Employees from CEO Sundar Pichai • Hacker News Board

Re: Note to Google Employees from CEO Sundar Pichai

#301

Post by morgtheborg » Tue, Aug 08, 2017, 5:26 PM UTC

camgunz wrote: post #297

morgtheborg wrote: post #294

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also, women DO have a harder time leading because their assertiveness is perceived significantly worse than similar assertiveness is men. I'll find the study if you'd like. And I think that's really what was missing from his piece; why do these differences exist and isn't it possible they are constructed rather than innate? He lists a few reasons he is convinced they are not, including their consistency across cultur…

> Also, women DO have a harder time leading because their assertiveness is perceived significantly worse than similar assertiveness is men. Women aren't the problem in this scenario.

That was my point. You can find sex "differences" but unless you somehow raised men and women separately, you'll be hard pressed to know which ones are innate and which ones are created through outside pressures.

Not in all cases, of course, but in terms of behavior.

Re: Note to Google Employees from CEO Sundar Pichai

#302

Post by Balgair » Tue, Aug 08, 2017, 5:27 PM UTC

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,…

It's funny to see how these 'hip-young-cool' tech companies have 'grown up' and implemented nearly the exact same internal cultures and processes as every other company. I had hoped they were going to really change things, and not just in a less racist/sexist/etc way, but in finding a new way to do HR and all that jazz. Like, they have enough fine grained data that Orwell rolling in his grave could power London, but they still slipped back into the same old paradigm as Exon and MS and Standard Oil (minus the racism/sexism/etc, for the most part). It's interesting to see it happen in ~ a decade only.

Re: Note to Google Employees from CEO Sundar Pichai

#303

Post by gurkendoktor » Tue, Aug 08, 2017, 5:30 PM UTC

camus2 wrote: post #248

dopamean wrote: post #201

I am a black dude from an upper middle class family that went to private school his whole life and I am very, very familiar with how it's possible to have great ethnic diversity but a severe lack of diversity in other areas (and how negatively that can affect things). Because of this I've often wondered how a company or any group of people can include perspectives that many other people find to be morally reprehensib…

> I genuinely don't understand how that's supposed to work and would love to hear some suggestions. The solution is entrepreneurship, that's all. Be your own boss as soon as possible during your career so you can manage your business the way you see fit. If you want to hire more black people then hire more black people. If you want to hire more women then do so as well. That's also true with the person that got fired…

> If he thinks Google's policies are detrimental to productivity, then he has to put his money where his mouth is and go start a business where he can implement his own hiring policies.

That only works if you are good at entrepreneurship and management in general. Most developers aren't (me included), so I think changing jobs to a more compatible company is the better option.

At least that's what I tell myself - punishing bad management decisions by quitting jobs/projects seems to be the most effective way of changing how software development is run.

> The guy should have quit then publish his paper

I think for those who agree with him, his getting fired only proved his point. If he did it the other way around, nobody would have even read the paper.

Re: Note to Google Employees from CEO Sundar Pichai

#304

Post by vivekd » Tue, Aug 08, 2017, 5:35 PM UTC

We have this thing called diversity policies, and some people agree with it, and some people disagree with it. The people who agree with it are free to present arguments about why workplaces are discriminatory and why diversity is valuable.

But with this - I'm starting to wonder if the same is true for the other side. Are people free to post counter arguments showing that lack of diversity may be due to other factors such as difference in behaviour or tendencies? It doesn't appear that way.

Re: Note to Google Employees from CEO Sundar Pichai

#305

Post by doubleshame » Tue, Aug 08, 2017, 5:36 PM UTC

dopamean wrote: post #201

I am a black dude from an upper middle class family that went to private school his whole life and I am very, very familiar with how it's possible to have great ethnic diversity but a severe lack of diversity in other areas (and how negatively that can affect things). Because of this I've often wondered how a company or any group of people can include perspectives that many other people find to be morally reprehensib…

Please allow me to honestly engage with you and break this down.

You're a black man at Google.

There is a study that says that ON AVERAGE across a large population of people, black men are relatively uneducated and relatively underperform on a particular aptitude test.

It is a known fact that although the larger population has 50% black people, only 10% of Google employees are black.

Now, let's assume that the common intention is to ensure equal OPPORTUNITY for all men. Please assume good faith for the purposes of this demonstration.

One fine day, you wake up to see an article posted by a white man that makes the following claims

- on average white men perform better at the standardized test (link to study)

- the standardized test tests similar skills that are needed for programming, and is similar to the Google interview

- therefore fewer black men get through the interview

- further, it is unfair to just give black people extra marks to pass. it leads to bad performance at work and diminishes the achievement of a black man who got in on pure effort

Now, a black man who cares would

- ask, wait a minute, why are blank men underperforming on the tests? Perhaps we skills fix our schools and colleges!

- point out flaws in the article (study is bad because... / AA is good because... / Other assumption is wrong because...)

These are engaging with the article in good faith.

A person interested in equal opportunity would not do the following

- burn the white man. Arrrggghhh!

- oh no that guy shared a study that shows that the black community is behind and points out what could be the problem. Let's shoot the messenger.

- falsely assign ecological bias to the article: white man said that all black men are bad programmers (not true, he was talking about populations)

These engage with the article in a manner that damages your goal of equal opportunity for black people.

Look for the opportunity to find systemic biases and problems and correct them. Assume good faith.

Don't be blind to something that makes you feel bad (and it shouldn't!) And therefore seek to burn it down without a thought.

Re: Note to Google Employees from CEO Sundar Pichai

#306

Post by vivekd » Tue, Aug 08, 2017, 5:38 PM UTC

dopamean wrote: post #201

I am a black dude from an upper middle class family that went to private school his whole life and I am very, very familiar with how it's possible to have great ethnic diversity but a severe lack of diversity in other areas (and how negatively that can affect things). Because of this I've often wondered how a company or any group of people can include perspectives that many other people find to be morally reprehensib…

So let's say someone wanted to put forward diversity policies at a workplace to create a more equal number of black and white workers. Perhaps the reason citied is that discrimination has led to disproportionate representation of the races.

My question is should people be allowed to present counter argumenents to the alleged discrimination and need for diversity. Should people be able to present data such as different levels of education attainment among races as explanation for lack of diversity? Would that be among the perspectives that are morally reprehensible?

If so, then isn't this whole diversity and equality thing not really an idea so much as some sort of new state religion that must not be questioned and is not subject to factual discussion or analysis.

Re: Note to Google Employees from CEO Sundar Pichai

#307

Post by dopamean » Tue, Aug 08, 2017, 5:38 PM UTC

dvfjsdhgfv wrote: post #229

dopamean wrote: post #201

I am a black dude from an upper middle class family that went to private school his whole life and I am very, very familiar with how it's possible to have great ethnic diversity but a severe lack of diversity in other areas (and how negatively that can affect things). Because of this I've often wondered how a company or any group of people can include perspectives that many other people find to be morally reprehensib…

Did the author really say that women are too stupid? No. He used his words rather carefully. What might have angered some people is his statement that women are more interested in people/relations while men are more interested in things. regardless of whether it's true, and if it is, whether the reasons are inherent or cultural - how is that bad? I can totally understand the author on this as I spent several years tr…

I'm sorry but your response doesn't really answer my question at all. What I want to hear are some suggestions about how to include people who hold inflammatory opinions in a group that generally doesn't share those opinions.

Re: Note to Google Employees from CEO Sundar Pichai

#308

Post by tchaffee » Tue, Aug 08, 2017, 5:43 PM UTC

fwn wrote: post #244

tchaffee wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> this is a very intimidating thing to do. It should be. If violating the CoC has no consequences then there should be no CoC in the first place. The CoC makes it clear that some actions and some types of speech are entirely unwelcome at the company. The memo also makes it clear that if you have a minority viewpoint that does not violate the CoC , then you should be encouraged to express those viewpoints. It even gav…

I do not know their full code of conduct. However, the part referenced by Pichai did not help to decrease uncertainty at all. This is problematic since the toxic effect of uncertainty and ideological supression at the work place is not mitigated by it being produced through arbitrary executives or an executives arbitrary interpretation of some given code of conduct. edit: If the purpose of the code of conduct is to c…

'...our Code of Conduct, which expects “each Googler to do their utmost to create a workplace culture that is free of harassment, intimidation, bias and unlawful discrimination.”'

What's confusing or unclear about that? It's crystal clear to me that Google prioritizes a workplace free of harassment over your individual ideology. If your ideology makes other employees feel harassed or intimidated, you'll have to leave your ideology at home.

And if you're not clever enough to understand that a statement in a widespread memo like "women, on average, have more neuroticism (higher anxiety, lower stress tolerance)" could cause one gender to feel intimidated or harassed, then perhaps you're not clever enough to work at Google.

Re: Note to Google Employees from CEO Sundar Pichai

#309

Post by josteink » Tue, Aug 08, 2017, 5:44 PM UTC

justinjlynn wrote: post #284

josteink wrote: post #274

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He had sources from here to the moon. Have you actually read the memo you are criticizing?

I had to look through four or so articles to find an edited and incomplete copy of the controversial text. Fortunately there are complete copies of it as it was originally posted linked elsewhere in the thread. It's possible that they haven't read it (in its unedited form including the references as intended by its author) because reporters have, for some reason, made it hard to find.

Try this one then: https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/3914586/Googles-I...

Re: Note to Google Employees from CEO Sundar Pichai

#310

Post by vivekd » Tue, Aug 08, 2017, 5:45 PM UTC

dopamean wrote: post #307

dvfjsdhgfv wrote: post #229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did the author really say that women are too stupid? No. He used his words rather carefully. What might have angered some people is his statement that women are more interested in people/relations while men are more interested in things. regardless of whether it's true, and if it is, whether the reasons are inherent or cultural - how is that bad? I can totally understand the author on this as I spent several years tr…

I'm sorry but your response doesn't really answer my question at all. What I want to hear are some suggestions about how to include people who hold inflammatory opinions in a group that generally doesn't share those opinions.

How do you know that the group doesn't generally share those opinions if those opinions are considered "inflammatory" and stating them can be punished. Maybe they're just afraid to speak up.