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

251–260 of 352 posts

Re: Google Can't Seem to Tolerate Diversity

#251

Post by stagbeetle »

rbanffy wrote: post #250
stagbeetle wrote: post #242

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a false equivalency. A better statement would be: "Will the Evangelical write a 10 page memo "explaining" why there are naturally fewer Atheists in church organizations because their beliefs makes the inherently less interested in it?" The answer would be yes. But it's not a good example.

Is your argument that software engineering is a religion women don't believe in?

My argument is that one's religious beliefs dictate what sort of organizations one will be a part of, just the same a person's physiological makeup will dictate his profession of choice.

Re: Google Can't Seem to Tolerate Diversity

#252

Post by tracker1 »

krotton wrote: post #191
Latty wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I keep seeing this kind of thing get said, but I'm not sure what the point is - are people really expecting people who espouse diversity to literally accept any opinion? Am I meant to work alongside a person who has literally said he wants me to die, completely seriously? So at some point, there is a line - I feel the more interesting discussion is why you feel this isn't beyond the line - presumably it comes down to…

Either: * You're hypothesizing and I don't quite get it, * haven't read the text and are basing on some misinterpretation you have seen somewhere on the internet * or you're purposefully lying (which I assume you're not). Please, just read the text: https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/3914586/Googles-I...

Thank you... I read through most of it, and while some may disagree with parts, I can't see why he should have been condemned and fired over it.

Re: Google Can't Seem to Tolerate Diversity

#253

Post by kafkaesq »

lliamander wrote: post #130
kafkaesq wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 ... Maybe some people are calling for stuff like that. But that's not what Google's doing to him. Google's just saying: "You can't do that here ."

And is arguably walking a very fine line in doing so. IANAL, but it is illegal for employers to use the threat of firing to compel employees to take (or avoid) a political course of action. Furthermore, it is illegal for employers to punish employees for speaking up about issues the employee believes affect working conditions (which was largely the premise of the employees essay). Google side-stepped the issue by fir…

I highly doubt that any judge (or sufficiently informed jury) would find that Google acted in response to any political activity on his part, per se.

Re: Google Can't Seem to Tolerate Diversity

#254

Post by kafkaesq »

jshevek wrote: post #222
kafkaesq wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 ... Maybe some people are calling for stuff like that. But that's not what Google's doing to him. Google's just saying: "You can't do that here ."

The terrible behaviors described by the parent post, are a part of the culture which drive so many individuals to demand that he be fired. Consider the people within Google who declare their unwillingness to work with the person that believes in science and in treating people like individuals.

their unwillingness to work with the person that believes in science

Actually I found his piece to be distinctly unscientific.

It parades as scientific, for sure. But when you break it down, and consider the whole of the message it imparts... at it's core, it was very unscientific.

And I bet that those at Google who decided to terminate his employment felt pretty much the same way.

Re: Google Can't Seem to Tolerate Diversity

#255

Post by kafkaesq »

dvfjsdhgfv wrote: post #207
kafkaesq wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 ... Maybe some people are calling for stuff like that. But that's not what Google's doing to him. Google's just saying: "You can't do that here ."

Can't do what exactly? The author not only clearly stated this, he even included a picture to make it clear: https://diversitymemo.com/population-overlap.png Does it really deserve a reaction of "You can't do that here"?

Does it really deserve a reaction of "You can't do that here"?

Google's decision was most definitely not in response to that graphic you linked to.

Re: Google Can't Seem to Tolerate Diversity

#256

Post by micahbright »

leereeves wrote: post #177
milcron wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

His "references" are mostly Wikipedia links. I wish he had posted the anti-echo-chamber parts on their own, instead of using them to decorate an argument on gender differences.

I agree they weren't the best references available. I doubt he expected this to blow up like it did; I imagine a Harvard PhD candidate would have provided better references if he'd known it would be public.

It's weird, but this is all pretty well known stuff in the fields from which he refers. And, as obsessed as we are with instilling diversity in everything, why even common people don't know these things who knows?

Re: Google Can't Seem to Tolerate Diversity

#257

Post by kafkaesq »

dvfjsdhgfv wrote: post #210
macspoofing wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>But that's not what Google's doing to him. Google's just saying: "You can't do that here." And that's probably OK and kind of expected. To me what was interesting was that even the CEO had to not only denounce it, but also cut his vacation short to hold a staff town-hall.

I find it hard to believe you really read the original piece ( https://diversitymemo.com/ ) and still consider he deserved being fired.

Neah, kinda just skimmed it.

That is, "really read" a select paragraph or two. Enough to make a basic determination as to what he's driving at -- and to note that we've seen variants of this message from other sources, before -- and make a decision about how much of one's attention resources it merits, moving forward -- accordingly.

As one does with any rant, or other poorly thought-out screed.

Re: Google Can't Seem to Tolerate Diversity

#258

Post by lliamander »

kafkaesq wrote: post #253
lliamander wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And is arguably walking a very fine line in doing so. IANAL, but it is illegal for employers to use the threat of firing to compel employees to take (or avoid) a political course of action. Furthermore, it is illegal for employers to punish employees for speaking up about issues the employee believes affect working conditions (which was largely the premise of the employees essay). Google side-stepped the issue by fir…

I highly doubt that any judge (or sufficiently informed jury) would find that Google acted in response to any political activity on his part, per se.

Perhaps not, but what was Google responding to? The central concern of the employee (as stated in his memo) was the political behavior by Google.

See also: https://www.cnbc.com/2017/08/07/it-may-be-illegal-for-google...

Re: Google Can't Seem to Tolerate Diversity

#259

Post by micahbright »

vkou wrote: post #101
coldtea wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The author was fired because some issues are considered thought crimes and you have to go with the mainstream opinion.

For a clear-cut example: Is calling my co-workers who are people of colour racial slurs a thought crime? Should I be fired for that, or should my employer tolerate it? Should I be allowed to make remarks about how evolutionary psychology tells me that women should be in the kitchen? Or that African Americans are predisposed to crime? At what point does saying things stops becoming thought crime, and starts becoming '…

> At what point does saying things ... starts becoming 'creating a hostile work environment'?

Certainly well known, supported, and referenced scientific facts, are not creating a hostile work environment. The fact that he was treated that way suggests that it is in fact a "thought crime".

Re: Google Can't Seem to Tolerate Diversity

#260

Post by lliamander »

kafkaesq wrote: post #253
lliamander wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And is arguably walking a very fine line in doing so. IANAL, but it is illegal for employers to use the threat of firing to compel employees to take (or avoid) a political course of action. Furthermore, it is illegal for employers to punish employees for speaking up about issues the employee believes affect working conditions (which was largely the premise of the employees essay). Google side-stepped the issue by fir…

I highly doubt that any judge (or sufficiently informed jury) would find that Google acted in response to any political activity on his part, per se.

The point is: the employee had concerns about working conditions at Google and how Google was pursuing it's goals. He even offered (what he believed) were useful suggestions. Other employees had similar concerns.

Instead of answering his concerns, they fired him because they thought his suggestions were offensive (or rooted in offensive ideology).

Post reply on HN