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

Outraged about the Google diversity memo?

backreaction.blogspot.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 872 posts

Re: Outraged about the Google diversity memo?

#151

Post by devwastaken »

KirinDave wrote: post #142
Const-me wrote: post #113

IMO the best comment from there: Giulio Prisco said... The results of this incident are easy to predict. Now everyone at Google (and everyone in large tech companies, and everyone in academy) knows that they can be fired for expressing opinions that dissent from the party line. Of course they'll shut up for fear of losing their job and the means to support their family. But they won't change their position. If anythi…

It's mysterious to me how literally every action a feminist takes is somehow directly responsibile for all problems that befall them, with every action that might possibly hurt a man being somehow a catastrophe in the making. Not 3 weeks ago we had a thread here where a woman spoke up about harassment and people said it was exactly the wrong thing. Mad someone for touching your bum? Speak up. You spoke up? Now you're…

>Mad at someone for touching your bum? Speak up.

Where is this being said? People will not take your position seriously if you're not using context, because you're misrepresenting what is happening. This is something thats done in other places, but as far as I know, has nothing to do with the memo, and nothing to do with the parent post you're responding to. Therefore, you're using a strawman.

Re: Outraged about the Google diversity memo?

#152

Post by jdoliner »

jancsika wrote: post #121

> And let us be clear that, yes, such policies mean every once in a while you will not hire the most skilled person for a job. Therefore, a value judgement must be made here, not a logical deduction from data. Is diversity important enough for you to temporarily tolerate an increased risk of not hiring the most qualified person? That’s the trade-off nobody seems willing to spell out. Perhaps because it's not a necess…

In no company in the world is this a "diversity policy." Diversity policies are the exact opposite of this. If they were as you describe, I'm sure the the author of the memo, and everyone who agrees with it, would be completely in support of them.

Re: Outraged about the Google diversity memo?

#153

Post by KirinDave »

devwastaken wrote: post #151
KirinDave wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's mysterious to me how literally every action a feminist takes is somehow directly responsibile for all problems that befall them, with every action that might possibly hurt a man being somehow a catastrophe in the making. Not 3 weeks ago we had a thread here where a woman spoke up about harassment and people said it was exactly the wrong thing. Mad someone for touching your bum? Speak up. You spoke up? Now you're…

>Mad at someone for touching your bum? Speak up. Where is this being said? People will not take your position seriously if you're not using context, because you're misrepresenting what is happening. This is something thats done in other places, but as far as I know, has nothing to do with the memo, and nothing to do with the parent post you're responding to. Therefore, you're using a strawman.

I'm referring to a Hacker News thread not even 3 weeks old.

In that specific paragraph I'm commenting on Hacker News, not the memo.

Re: Outraged about the Google diversity memo?

#154

Post by CobrastanJorji »

fsaneq2 wrote: post #138
Const-me wrote: post #113

IMO the best comment from there: Giulio Prisco said... The results of this incident are easy to predict. Now everyone at Google (and everyone in large tech companies, and everyone in academy) knows that they can be fired for expressing opinions that dissent from the party line. Of course they'll shut up for fear of losing their job and the means to support their family. But they won't change their position. If anythi…

EDIT: Removed comment. See better response below.

That's a really weird conclusion to draw based on that statistic. Another way to say the same thing would be "Donald Trump performed more poorly in California than any other Republican candidate since 1936."

(I see he removed his comment. For posterity, he argued that Donald Trump got "almost a third" of the votes in California and, therefore, liberals were on the decline).

Re: Outraged about the Google diversity memo?

#155

Post by dabernathy89 »

steveeq1 wrote: post #26

> That leaked internal memo from James Damore at Google? The one that says one shouldn’t expect employees in all professions to reflect the demographics of the whole population? I don't see how this is an unreasonable argument to make. There is a dearth of male kindergarten teachers, for instance. This doesn't mean the school is being "sexist". It might just mean that certain genders tend to be attracted to certain t…

In the latter parts of that paragraph, the author agrees with you.

Re: Outraged about the Google diversity memo?

#156

Post by KirinDave »

fsaneq2 wrote: post #145

Come on, try to make an effort. Your comment is full of straw men.

Just because you're unaware of the context doesn't make it a straw man. There is a larger ongoing dialogue at HN in which this theme consistently crops up.

And coincidentally, it is also a consistent argument that having a memory of these threads is either unfair or unsportsmanlike.

Re: Outraged about the Google diversity memo?

#157

Post by axlprose »

OscarCunningham wrote: post #146
jancsika wrote: post #121

> And let us be clear that, yes, such policies mean every once in a while you will not hire the most skilled person for a job. Therefore, a value judgement must be made here, not a logical deduction from data. Is diversity important enough for you to temporarily tolerate an increased risk of not hiring the most qualified person? That’s the trade-off nobody seems willing to spell out. Perhaps because it's not a necess…

What if you do that and the number of women in the orchestra shrinks?

Or even if the number of women just stays the same. Is the effort to level the playing field then deemed a 'failure' if the results don't change in the way they're expected to?

That's the important question here, especially since there have now been preliminary experiments in tech interviews suggesting such an outcome is not implausible:

http://blog.interviewing.io/we-built-voice-modulation-to-mas...

Re: Outraged about the Google diversity memo?

#158

Post by yorwba »

panda88888 wrote: post #106
steveeq1 wrote: post #26

> That leaked internal memo from James Damore at Google? The one that says one shouldn’t expect employees in all professions to reflect the demographics of the whole population? I don't see how this is an unreasonable argument to make. There is a dearth of male kindergarten teachers, for instance. This doesn't mean the school is being "sexist". It might just mean that certain genders tend to be attracted to certain t…

Playing the devil's advocate...it could mean the school is being "sexist"

It does indicate that there is some mechanism that affects different genders differently, but that alone is not enough to assume sexism, you need additional evidence to single out that explanation.

I think the gender differences are driven by a combination of genetics, stereotypes, personal preferences, and yes, sexism, acting in a feedback loop. Genetics cause a slight natural difference; this gets summarized as a stereotype; people comparing themselves with the stereotype develop their preferences based on that; and if they don't conform, they are seen as abnormal (e.g. male kindergarten teachers get suspected of pedophilia) and are correspondingly discriminated against.

Re: Outraged about the Google diversity memo?

#159

Post by nailer »

KirinDave wrote: post #150
kentrado wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Mad at someone for saying you're genetically predisposed to be less capable of individual action? He never said that. Could you cite the portion where he literally says women are less capable?

He says women will benefit from making coding more social. Pair programming. Remember?

That's not the same thing as telling an individual they're less capable.

Re: Outraged about the Google diversity memo?

#160

Post by dang »

imminentviolet wrote: post #107
Johnny555 wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or it might mean that certain genders tend to be dissuaded from pursuing certain career paths.

So what? There are some barriers, implicit and explicit, that are perfectly appropriate. Some of them serve a higher purpose, like reinforcing gender archetypes and standards of behavior that are productive in the long run in their own ways. Why should we be so quick to demolish those because a few loud mouths want to destroy them? If exceptional people really have something to offer in areas where they are shunned f…

It's an abuse of HN to use it primarily for political or ideological battle. Since this account has been doing this, and also has broken the HN guidelines by being uncivil, we've banned it.
Post reply on HN