Live data from Hacker News

Outraged about the Google diversity memo?

backreaction.blogspot.com

281–290 of 872 posts

Re: Outraged about the Google diversity memo?

#281
post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ok, but agreeing with the infamous memo doesn't make someone a far right extremist. The parent comment suggested it will push them to vote for a harder-line movement but there is a big margin between being opposed to affirmative action and white supremacists.

I absolutely agree that agreeing with the memo doesn't make someone a far right extremist, and I don't believe I ever stated or insinuated that. That's a bit of a non-sequitur, though. This is the exact point I was referring to: they won't change their position. If anything, their position will be radicalized. For example, from classical liberal to alt-right. This is been a common sort of mantra since Trump won the p…

Do you think the author will be radicalized? When I try to empathize with Damore the alt-right looks welcoming while liberals look very unwelcoming. I could see myself being drawn towards the group that accepts me (or doesn't attack me). That's the process that I assumed from the radicalization idea. Have I missed the mark?

Re: Outraged about the Google diversity memo?

#282

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…

If a person is engaging in reasonable dissent then why is this true: "If anything, their position will be radicalized."? The (true) implication is that their reasonable dissent actually is a bland cover for a position that is much more radical once it is reduced to its core propositions.

[deleted]

Re: Outraged about the Google diversity memo?

#283

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Trust in Trump has plummeted, even amongst his core. The vote is very quickly slipping out of the grasp of the Right This is certainly the message being broadcast into every home on the planet for the last 6 moths. In reality it seems a bit optimistic when we consider the Democrats are coming from a decade-long losing streak ( http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2015/jan/25/... ), a monumentally embarra…

Right now, we have two indicators: The way the swings on the special elections are going, which are all violently swinging away from the Republicans, even if Republicans end up winning, it's barely by single digits in double digit districts. And the polling, which in aggregate, across all demographics, has been continually moving more and more negative each passing month. Even polls like Rasmussen, which have a tradi…

This is a nice debate topic, because we'll have a clear cut answer next year. If you truly believe there is at least a 50% chance of Democrats controlling the house or 20% chance in the senate, you can make some easy money:

house: https://www.predictit.org/Market/2704/Which-party-will-contr...

senate: https://www.predictit.org/Market/2703/Which-party-will-contr...

Re: Outraged about the Google diversity memo?

#284
You know something? I have come around on my thinking on this topic.

There is a single central point where everyone on both sides of this debate are getting stuck and that is in the nature of the term "Sexism." What helped me to better understand what people mean when they say "Sexism" is to replace that word with the phrase: "Males Competing For Limited Resources With Females."

Once I made that mental shift I really was able to bridge to a place where I can sort of see what people from the Left are trying to say (but the problem is they are using a meaningless and overwrought phrase to get there and also attempting to jam insane ideas down people's throats using Orwellian tactics along the way while holding onto delusional optimistic views about reality). ahem

There are limited jobs at Google, very very high paying jobs which everyone in the entire world wants. There are people living in absolutely desperate circumstances all around America (let alone the entire globe!) who would basically kill for a job at Google. You see people lying in their own filth every day in downtown San Francisco who can't hold a job down and pay rent. The ones who can actually afford rent (barely) are sometimes not all that much better off.

If you think these people are going to be nice to one another once they get inside Google and are competing for the same promotions, you are hilariously wrong.

I have seen myself what men in large corporations are willing to do to one another in a closed environment with few promotions and resources: We are f*cking really mean to one another. We back-stab. We lie. We undermine. I have done it myself, it was fun when I was winning and awful when it was being done to me.

Large corporations spend a tremendous amount of money on PR and marketing to polish their images, but inside they are filled with men acting like rats trapped in a jar with dwindling food pellets: They eat each other sometimes. Maybe 15-35% of the time, but its enough.

Now add in a couple women to this environment: The experiment ends badly for them unless some structures are put into place. Men can and will tend to use whatever techniques they have at their disposal to get rid of or manipulate those around them. This includes being condescending and demeaning to reduce the influence of women.

However, no matter what you do. No matter how much you train your workforce, when you lift the lid you are going to find the following: Men competing with women and other men for few resources and promotions.

The problem is that corporations are built around making employees compete with one another. Thats how promotions work! Thats how money and stock are allocated: You did better than your peers or screwed them over so they failed.

The biggest lie companies like Google and Facebook tell the world is that they are lovely meritocracies ruled by fairness when they aren't. Google, Facebook, Microsoft, Amazon all share the same thing in common: People competing using whatever tools they have to get few resources.

All this SJW bullshit is simply an attempt to polish what is fundamentally a smiling bloodsport and always will be, its how corporations work.

Re: Outraged about the Google diversity memo?

#285

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…

If a person is engaging in reasonable dissent then why is this true: "If anything, their position will be radicalized."? The (true) implication is that their reasonable dissent actually is a bland cover for a position that is much more radical once it is reduced to its core propositions.

Nonsense.

If you treat me with respect I will treat you with respect. We can have a civil disagreement and the next day I'll happily help you out.

Being able to disagree is healthy. I disagree with my wife and with my children on some pretty important issues.

On the other hand if you try and ruin my career, or if I think you will try and ruin my career, then I will knock you down at every opportunity.

Re: Outraged about the Google diversity memo?

#286

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?

Schoolteachers are trained to provide just this type of variety for just this type of reason. For example, they're supposed to have competitive classes because boys are generally more motivated by competition than cooperation. It's uncontroversially seen as a good and wholesome thing for teachers to do it. Why is it demon spawn for programmers?

Re: Outraged about the Google diversity memo?

#287

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> He explicitely did not say (nor mean) that a woman can't be a good software engineer. > Just that on average, more men than women will show the features needed for software engineers. Read those two sentences you wrote again. You'll be shocked when you see it.

I'm not seeing it. Help me out? It's not a contradiction, if that's what you're implying. Have you ever taken a statistics class?

Oh, throwaway257157, if I thought you were posting in good faith, I'd certainly engage with you but using a newly created account means you aren't.

Re: Outraged about the Google diversity memo?

#288
post #255

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> He explicitely did not say (nor mean) that a woman can't be a good software engineer. > Just that on average, more men than women will show the features needed for software engineers. Read those two sentences you wrote again. You'll be shocked when you see it.

I took the liberty of labeling one of the diagrams in the document with two points labeled A and B. How would you interpret the relationship of these points if A was a man and B was a woman? http://imgur.com/a/kWyTi

I would definitely agree that A was to the left of B. I would also concede that B is to the right of A. But since the only label on the graph is an unidentified "Trait", I couldn't really comment any further.

What point are you trying to make?

Re: Outraged about the Google diversity memo?

#289
I'm trying to understand his motivations, maybe it is just naivety, but that he wanted to talk about something that was bothering him, and didn't understand why he couldn't (or shouldn't) talk about it publicly seems fairly typical of a condition like aspergers, is it possible he simply has something like that?

Either way the witch hunt needs to cease immediately.

Re: Outraged about the Google diversity memo?

#290
post #78

Really great post, and I had what I thought were some great observations about the article I wanted to share. But then in the article's comments I read this by Outer M.: "By the way, in science and technology, conservatism is a minority ideology (he says so himself in his letter). How would he feel if we start saying that conservative people aren't apt for science and technology? That if he doesn't feel welcome he sh…

> By the way, in science and technology, conservatism is a minority ideology (he says so himself in his letter). How would he feel if we start saying that conservative people aren't apt for science and technology?

Nice find. As someone who doesn't identify as either liberal or conservative, if my ideology made me unsuited for tech, that should definitely be acknowledged. Pretending isn't helpful to anyone.

And I bet the author of the memo would agree with me in terms of his ideology (classical liberalism).

Post reply on HN