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

What scientists think about the biological claims made by a Google employee?

quora.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 47 posts

Re: What scientists think about the biological claims made by a Google employee?

#21

Post by slindz »

Boothroid wrote: post #17

Am I the only one that sees an inconsistency between the touchy feely world of inclusiveness and diversity within these US tech companies, and the Darwinian harshness of life outside them in the US? I'm thinking of what seems to an outsider like a generally held callousness towards those that fall through the cracks, and a focus on individual agency as being the sole determinant of success, ignoring very real factors…

No. Plenty of people see what's happening and play along because it's pretty dangerous not to.

This guy was naive enough to try and present a rational and measured suggestion for meaningful improvement.

Re: What scientists think about the biological claims made by a Google employee?

#22

Post by dvfjsdhgfv »

jardaroh wrote: post #18
dvfjsdhgfv wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, but she uses counterarguments based on relevant past studies rather than empty "everyone knows it's just sexism" style of arguing that we've seen so far in the media.

But most of her counter arguments are against arguments the original author never made or at best against misrepresentations.

That's a good start nevertheless, a level above the usual "what a sexist pig" pseudo-arguments. Reading each of these articles I learn something more, I expand my knowledge of things that weren't even in my area of interest, I get more understanding as to what is offending other people these days... I think a discussion based on merits is extremely useful, and I'm sad seeing all these articles quickly flagged.

Re: What scientists think about the biological claims made by a Google employee?

#23

Post by slindz »

dvfjsdhgfv wrote: post #22
jardaroh wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But most of her counter arguments are against arguments the original author never made or at best against misrepresentations.

That's a good start nevertheless, a level above the usual "what a sexist pig" pseudo-arguments. Reading each of these articles I learn something more, I expand my knowledge of things that weren't even in my area of interest, I get more understanding as to what is offending other people these days... I think a discussion based on merits is extremely useful, and I'm sad seeing all these articles quickly flagged.

How many levels until we're talking about the fair points he made, along with the well-intentioned suggestions he was making?

Re: What scientists think about the biological claims made by a Google employee?

#24

Post by dvfjsdhgfv »

slindz wrote: post #23
dvfjsdhgfv wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a good start nevertheless, a level above the usual "what a sexist pig" pseudo-arguments. Reading each of these articles I learn something more, I expand my knowledge of things that weren't even in my area of interest, I get more understanding as to what is offending other people these days... I think a discussion based on merits is extremely useful, and I'm sad seeing all these articles quickly flagged.

How many levels until we're talking about the fair points he made, along with the well-intentioned suggestions he was making?

We don't live in an ideal world. People have their own agendas, obsessions, feelings etc. that obscure their judgement. It will definitely take a long while.

Re: What scientists think about the biological claims made by a Google employee?

#25

Post by slindz »

slindz wrote: post #23
dvfjsdhgfv wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a good start nevertheless, a level above the usual "what a sexist pig" pseudo-arguments. Reading each of these articles I learn something more, I expand my knowledge of things that weren't even in my area of interest, I get more understanding as to what is offending other people these days... I think a discussion based on merits is extremely useful, and I'm sad seeing all these articles quickly flagged.

How many levels until we're talking about the fair points he made, along with the well-intentioned suggestions he was making?

> We don't live in an ideal world. People have their own agendas, obsessions, feelings etc. that obscure their judgement. It will definitely take a long while.

Well, when you put it like that, firing the guy was clearly the best decision.....

edit: formatting

Re: What scientists think about the biological claims made by a Google employee?

#26

Post by pdkl95 »

dvfjsdhgfv wrote: post #19
s_kilk wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The guy is absolutely pushing an alt-right agenda, it's plain to see in the manifesto, and that's before we get to his guest appearance on a prominent alt-right YouTube show.

It would be far more interesting to see him on a Progressive YouTube show, however, as he says, few people who criticized him contacted him personally. I don't think he'd avoid such a confrontation if he was given a chance, but my feeling is that in current PC climate some people would be offended just by hearing what he says, so it's unlikely he'd even get invited.

> however, as he says, few people who criticized him contacted him personally

According to the Guardian[1], "Damore initially told the Guardian he would answer questions by email on Monday, but then stopped responding to inquiries. He had a few brief email exchanges with reporters, including at the New York Times, Bloomberg and the rightwing site website Breitbart."

Giving an extended interview with Molyneux instead of the NYT or even Breitbart is not recommended if you want to avoid being seen as anti-feminist or "alt-right".

[1] https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/aug/09/james-dam...

Re: What scientists think about the biological claims made by a Google employee?

#27

Post by craigsmansion »

It's great that someone took the time and had the peace of mind to write down this firm rebuttal.

Sexist or not, the original manifesto was anti science. How so many whose paycheck depends on the implementation of logic got hoodwinked into defending what basically amounts to an political pamphlet by a couple of references baffles me.

Re: What scientists think about the biological claims made by a Google employee?

#28

Post by zimablue »

craigsmansion wrote: post #27

It's great that someone took the time and had the peace of mind to write down this firm rebuttal. Sexist or not, the original manifesto was anti science. How so many whose paycheck depends on the implementation of logic got hoodwinked into defending what basically amounts to an political pamphlet by a couple of references baffles me.

More scientists have written in defense than opposition, and even the most hardened opposition concedes the validity of some of his sources.

Re: What scientists think about the biological claims made by a Google employee?

#29

Post by slindz »

Klockan wrote: post #5

> argues that cognitive sex differences influence performance in software engineering. Damore never argued for this, he argued that cognitive sex differences could possibly influence interest in software engineering work as it done today and that difference in interest could partially explain the gender gap in tech. He then suggest that we try alternate approaches when we try to increase women's representation since…

Exactly this.

I have never wanted to use all caps so badly before in my life.

I feel like I'm taking crazy pills.

Re: What scientists think about the biological claims made by a Google employee?

#30

Post by pawadu »

dublinclontarf wrote: post #6
s_kilk wrote: post #2

TLDR; manifesto guy was egregiously wrong in basically all assertions.

Author has misread, misunderstood, and misrepresented manifesto guys doc, attributed motives AND tried to tie this into the alt-right.

I think at this point we can all agree that Damore tied himself to alt-right by doing those interviews.

edit: I find it interesting that most comments criticizing the guy is heavily downvoted while his supporters claim they are being gagged

Post reply on HN