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

Google Can't Seem to Tolerate Diversity

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 352 posts

Re: Google Can't Seem to Tolerate Diversity

#91

Post by Aqua »

leereeves wrote: post #14
sidlls wrote: post #8

What's more likely: the author was fired for suggesting alternate methods of improving diversity at Google or the author was fired for repeating unsupported gender stereotypes, offering alternate methods that themselves played on gender stereotypes, and creating an environment in which he would not be able to effectively carry out his responsibilities as a result of promoting gender stereotypes?

> unsupported Did you only read the Gizmodo version that removed all the references? Here's a copy with the references: https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/3914586/Googles-I...

So the media are manipulating content of the document in order to provoke their readers. This is outrageous, I feel sorry for the guy. Freedom of speech is threatened by obssesive political correctness that silences unpopular points of view.

Re: Google Can't Seem to Tolerate Diversity

#92

Post by sushisource »

influx wrote: post #67
kevinburke wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A right to free speech doesn't mean you are also free from any consequences for that speech.. ? The Constitution allows you to say whatever you want but your employer's also free to fire you for saying it. As an example, if you say racist things to a customer, your employer should be able to fire you. I have heard people say he should get fired, but I haven't heard anyone saying he should be "expelled from society" o…

Curious if you feel Colin Kaepernick should have been fired and blacklisted for supporting Black Lives Matter? After all, it was only a consequence of free speech from his employers.

"Feel he should have been fired" and "Wouldn't throw a fit if he was fired" are different things.

Do I think this guy should have been fired? I dunno. Not sure. I need more context.

Am I upset he was fired? No. That's Google's choice, regardless of how good a choice it is or isn't.

Re: Google Can't Seem to Tolerate Diversity

#93

Post by JSONwebtoken »

int_19h wrote: post #25
naturalgradient wrote: post #10

What this whole episode really seems to show is how authoritarianism has crept into our lives and how incredibly difficult it is to resist it even amongst highly educated people. I would wager that none of the people calling for this person to be personally ruined, expelled from society, terminated from their job and forever vilified as an outcast would view themselves as authoritarian. Not the Tweeters shaking with…

> Not the Ex-Google guy with his medium rant about how people would punch him in the face and he would understand. Could you give a link to that rant?

It's funny that I read past this line without even thinking about how unusual it is that it needs a source. I've read so many blogposts and tweets about how it's justifiable to punch people in the face over specific disagreements that I'm completely desensitized to the hilarious image of grown, educated adults lashing out just because they're losing an argument.

It seems like every time I make a politically controversial post on Reddit and increasingly HN, I can just CTRL-F my comment inbox and assure myself that there's some reference to punching in there.

Re: Google Can't Seem to Tolerate Diversity

#94

Post by jorgemf »

I find it funny he was fired by "promoting gender stereotypes" when what he wants it to evaluate each individual without taking account any stereotype. And then Google has policies for increasing the minority diversity (like helping women to get in tech). Just the fact you have programs target for specific demographics supports the fact that there are "gender stereotypes". Not to mention all the analytics tools that split the population by gender.

I would find more helpful if companies have programs to increase the tolerance and respect inside the company. Because the problem of sexims or racism are not the women or the black people, the problem is the people with prejudices. Adding to the company people of minorities is useless if the internal culture is a shit. At some point they will leave the company. I think Google made a step in the wrong direction and promote a worse culture with this action. People now will not talk about issues afraid of getting fired, even when they do it with respect.

Re: Google Can't Seem to Tolerate Diversity

#95

Post by runako »

eco wrote: post #19

> Media outlets like TechCrunch, Gizmodo and Motherboard jumped on board to declare the memo an “Anti-Diversity Manifesto.” It appears that the ideological echo chamber extends beyond Google’s campus. As I look up and see this article flagged on HN (since unflagged). The points and ideas from his memo may be wrong or they may be right (or anywhere in between) but more important than this incident has been the reactio…

> I don't understand the attempts at shutting down conversation about it

To try to shed a little light on this phenomenon, the "it" you refer to expands to "why women and minorities may be biologically less qualified for this job, and those that are here as our teammates are illegitimate in some way."

Using the expansion in your paragraph:

=====

I don't understand the attempts at shutting down conversation about why women and minorities may be biologically less qualified for this job, and those that are here as our teammates are illegitimate in some way. If you think he's wrong, you share your opinion and persuade others. You don't shut down the conversation and pretend that women and minorities are biologically as qualified for this job, or that their hires are as legitimate as anyone else's.

=====

That's what some people are hearing. Hopefully it's obvious why management at most companies would consider these discussions to be less than helpful in fostering the most productive work environment.

Re: Google Can't Seem to Tolerate Diversity

#96

Post by onli »

tptacek wrote: post #55

This Bloomberg blog post doesn't add anything more to the discussion of what happened than would any >100 word comment, drawn at random from the biggest HN thread on this fiasco. All it's doing here is giving us a license to pointlessly recapitulate the same debate we had yesterday and the day before. Stuff like this is what the flag button on the site is for.

The media, that before completely warped what the memo is saying, now reporting differently is interesting, relevant to HN and newsworthy, and not something we saw yesterday.

Re: Google Can't Seem to Tolerate Diversity

#97

Post by macspoofing »

canoebuilder wrote: post #58
macspoofing wrote: post #6

I am surprised how big this 'manifesto' got. Is it really that big of a deal that it a) got all the press that it got and b) that it required a personal condemnation from "Head of Diversity" and the CEO - who will now hold a town-hall to, I guess, denounce it even more? The entire thing seems like a big nothing-burger from every side.

I am surprised how big this 'manifesto' got. Imagine how surreal this must be for Damore. In regards to the explosive nature of this episode, I think it is indicative of the people who seem to be going progressively more insane's realization that their little social engineering experiments curry no favor in the halls of reality and their misguided efforts are rapidly being washed out to the sea of history while the s…

>Imagine how surreal this must be for Damore.

I'm not 100% convinced that he didn't expect this. Some of the points he raised are valid and people should be able to agree to disagree. But the points about biological differences being responsible for women not being interested in STEM are controversial. I don't think Science is there on that - so raising them in this kind of a manifesto is inflammatory.

Re: Google Can't Seem to Tolerate Diversity

#98

Post by jdavis703 »

naturalgradient wrote: post #10

What this whole episode really seems to show is how authoritarianism has crept into our lives and how incredibly difficult it is to resist it even amongst highly educated people. I would wager that none of the people calling for this person to be personally ruined, expelled from society, terminated from their job and forever vilified as an outcast would view themselves as authoritarian. Not the Tweeters shaking with…

> What this whole episode really seems to show is how authoritarianism has crept into our lives and how incredibly difficult it is to resist it even amongst highly educated people.

How is this any different than if I was to exercise my "free speech" to insult my CEO and found myself fired? This was a private corporation, operating in an at-will employment state. Now if the government had taken steps to censor speech, one could argue that we're in an authoritarian regime. But workplaces have always (at least since I've been working), been places where we voluntarily subject ourselves to private authority, or else quit or are fired.

Re: Google Can't Seem to Tolerate Diversity

#99

Post by sidlls »

leereeves wrote: post #14
sidlls wrote: post #8

What's more likely: the author was fired for suggesting alternate methods of improving diversity at Google or the author was fired for repeating unsupported gender stereotypes, offering alternate methods that themselves played on gender stereotypes, and creating an environment in which he would not be able to effectively carry out his responsibilities as a result of promoting gender stereotypes?

> unsupported Did you only read the Gizmodo version that removed all the references? Here's a copy with the references: https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/3914586/Googles-I...

Those references are actually the opposite of helpful to his case. And, in fact, as a biologist he ought to know better than to apply the generalizations he refers to to specific populations or individuals.

Re: Google Can't Seem to Tolerate Diversity

#100

Post by rifung »

naturalgradient wrote: post #62
kajecounterhack wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, what the whole episode really seems to show is how prejudice that hurts people is viewed as "just words" rather than a tangible / real hurtful thing. You can't curse off your boss. You can't demean people of other genders and races at work. You can't create a hostile workplace environment and expect nothing to happen to you. You can try to cloak it in a longform "civil" or "facts-based" document but ultimately wh…

This is authoritarian logic. A threat is never just an opinion in authoritarian thinking. It's outside of what constitutes an opinion, it's outside the system. Hence, for the greater good, it must be not just be rejected, it must be destroyed as a moral necessity. If you go down this road, there is only one destination. I can sympathise with your view point. Of course I can. That is my whole point. It takes incredibl…

I'm not sure I understand your point so please correct me if I misunderstand, but the person wasn't fired for having a different opinion.

He was fired for saying things which were deeply hurtful for a large number of employees.

Post reply on HN