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

211–220 of 352 posts

Re: Google Can't Seem to Tolerate Diversity

#211

Post by stefantalpalaru »

canoebuilder wrote: post #134

Who wants to discuss the suppression of content on HN? 163 pts in 37 mins, but flagged off the front page as soon as it appeared. Does the number of flags required to trip the [flagged] trigger increase with the number of points and speed of those points on a story? If not, why not? Yes one could say rapid point accrual on a story of this nature is telling of a hot-button issue that and thus likely to create discussi…

> Who wants to discuss the suppression of content on HN?

Careful. This is how you get hellbanned.

Re: Google Can't Seem to Tolerate Diversity

#212

Post by ithilglin909 »

BertPhoo wrote: post #206
jorgemf wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

oh shit I am going to be fired for this? I said people and I mean people, not girls or boys.

Of course you meant people ;) But it's not like this thread is full of people saying the exact same thing who haven't declared they are women.

You’re just trying to give us another example of how to read something innocuous in an unreasonably negative light…right? ;)

Re: Google Can't Seem to Tolerate Diversity

#213

Post by jorgemf »

noncoml wrote: post #203
jorgemf wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hey, from the original document (I have added the references for you): - Openness directed towards feelings and aesthetics rather than ideas. Women generally also have a stronger interest in people rather than things [1], relative to men (also interpreted as empathizing vs. systemizing [2]) - Extraversion expressed as gregariousness rather than assertiveness. Also, higher agreeableness. - Neuroticism [3] (higher anxi…

> Now what do you think about it, now you know the real references of the article? I think that a quick dismissal is not appropriate, that it is the right basis for a discussion and would definitely like to take some time and look at the citations and how they tie up and support the arguments.

Now I can reply: I apologize because my comment sound like an attack when It wasn't my intention. I just wanted to provide the references and know your opinion. Take your time to check them.

Re: Google Can't Seem to Tolerate Diversity

#214

Post by jorgemf »

BertPhoo wrote: post #206
jorgemf wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

oh shit I am going to be fired for this? I said people and I mean people, not girls or boys.

Of course you meant people ;) But it's not like this thread is full of people saying the exact same thing who haven't declared they are women.

I think I should reply to everybody who said the exact same thing with different world telling them that there should be more people like them. Maybe even create a community only for this type of people... or better not because I could be accused of discrimination.

Maybe I should delete my original comment but I might offend someone too if I delete it.

Life is complicated, I would jump from the window to end it but I think it will also offend someone.

Ok, fuck it. I am happy. I don't care!

Re: Google Can't Seem to Tolerate Diversity

#215

Post by tevonsb »

I find it rather sad that, before writing this comment I had to reconsider what I wanted to say , because, as a young engineer, I am worried how my opinions will effect my job prospects.

When I am afraid to say what I believe, for fear or ramifications, it flies directly in the face of what Google and others profess to trying to do: 'create a work environment in which all people, regardless of political affliation, opinion, or creed feels safe.'

The worst part for me, is that many in the valley (particularly on university campuses like Stanford's) have used the disguise of promoting diversity to battle ideas they disagree with. There is not enough emphasis on diversity of ideas.

Re: Google Can't Seem to Tolerate Diversity

#216

Post by macspoofing »

MBCook wrote: post #165
macspoofing wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I'd guess that you feel that way because you're not affected by the issues discussed in the essay. I don't work at Google, so I'm not. The manifesto itself is controversial in that if you poll the plurality of the population or employees of Google on whether they agree with some or all of it, you won't have consensus, I'm sure of it. >I've been there myself, it takes a lot of time and effort to understand the real i…

I think what the GP meant is that if you're a young white guy this all seems a bit accedemic because your job isn't in direct question. Perhaps it would be harder to get hired in the future. If you're in a minority being questioned (women here, could be a racial group, age range, etc) people are directly questioning your ability and implying you aren't fit for your job. It looks like a much more personal attack. So t…

>I think what the GP meant is that if you're a young white guy

I know what he meant. I know what you mean as well. This isn't a substantive conversation on the issue. You and OP are not putting forward a cogent argument to support a position. You're making an appeal to emotion and valuing an opinion based on the skin color and gender of the person that argued it - not on its own merits.

>It looks like a much more personal attack.

And what does what you are doing look like to you?

Re: Google Can't Seem to Tolerate Diversity

#217

Post by Const-me »

nxsynonym wrote: post #34
azinman2 wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But it’s not civil when you suggest there’s inherently biological reasons for your coworkers to be inferior to you.

But it is. Just because he holds one opinion does not mean that he will act on it, expect google to act on it, or cause harm because of it. Ideas don't hurt people. People with no way to voice their ideas and opinions become angry, and then hurt other people.

Some ideas do. For example, Nazi’s master race idea hurt badly.

However, I don’t see how that’s relevant. The author of that memo didn’t wrote about male superiority of anything similar. He talked about statistically significant differences, and proposed ideas for google to attract more female employees without discriminating against males.

Re: Google Can't Seem to Tolerate Diversity

#218

Post by nowo »

quickben wrote: post #16
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?

It depends. Is Google 50-50 male female ratio, or 95-5? Likelihood usually change on the environment, just look at Uber.

Women 31% overall, 20% tech.

https://www.google.com/diversity/

Re: Google Can't Seem to Tolerate Diversity

#219

Post by tevonsb »

onli wrote: post #96
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.

Absolutely seconded, this is the first article with this tone that I've seen

Re: Google Can't Seem to Tolerate Diversity

#220

Post by rifung »

dangerlibrary wrote: post #133
rifung wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Disclaimer: I work for Google I assume you're talking about when the Department of Labor asked for more information on employees? If so, I don't believe they actually found any gender pay gap; they were merely asking for more data which Google refused to give up due to privacy concerns. The judge ruled in Google's favor so it's hardly "hot water" ( https://techcrunch.com/2017/07/16/judge-sides-with-google-in... )

> The Department of Labor’s increasingly heated dispute with Google over a gender pay gap began, innocently enough, with a routine audit. > During the audit, however, the agency found “systemic compensation disparities against women pretty much across the entire workforce,” according to testimony from a DoL official. > The lawsuit was about accessing data, not the merits of the DoL’s arguments, she says, pointing out…

I stand corrected. Thank you for pointing that out!
Post reply on HN