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

301–310 of 872 posts

Re: Outraged about the Google diversity memo?

#301

Post by type0 »

GVIrish wrote: post #266
dx034 wrote: post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> He was fired because he basically said women are underrepresented in IT because they are biologically unsuited for it. I don't understand why people keep repeating that statement. He said that biological differences explain the different ratios of men and women, NOT that women are not suited for tech jobs. He explicitely did not say (nor mean) that a woman can't be a good software engineer. Just that on average, mo…

> I don't understand why people keep repeating that statement. He said that biological differences explain the different ratios of men and women, NOT that women are not suited for tech jobs. 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. The problem is that his whole argument is based…

> The problem is that his whole argument is based around biological determinism

It's not based on biological determinism, he provides references to the current state of psychological research and simply wants a discussion about the policy

> this manifesto

it's not a manifesto by any means unless you want to call everything a manifesto including your post.

> Women in IT sometimes have to contend with attitudes that 'women are bad at math' or 'women are irrational' or 'women only care about aesthetics'.

There were no such things in his text, not even remotely close

> then he proceeds to discuss that as the only reason the gender gap exists.

He explicitly questions those causes, please stop projecting your ideology on things you read

Re: Outraged about the Google diversity memo?

#302

Post by maehwasu »

GVIrish wrote: post #250
maehwasu wrote: post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"You can say anything you want, unless you're saying something that I choose to define as unacceptable."

When has that ever not been the case in the workplace? Every workplace has norms and values where someone who runs afoul of them may be fired. Norms change over time. There was a time when it would've been okay to use the 'n' word to insult black people in many work places, now it's not okay. There was a time when lewd and demeaning talk about women was ok in the workplace, now it's not. The people who sign the check…

Completely agree. The point here is that the situation isn't static: many people don't like what is now ok in the workplace, and are trying to shift it back.

Simply calling them "racist" or "sexist" as if that ends the discussion completely misses the point.

Re: Outraged about the Google diversity memo?

#303

Post by e40 »

reubeniv wrote: post #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.

That was my first thought after reading a small portion of the memo.

Re: Outraged about the Google diversity memo?

#304

Post by [deleted] »

minipci1321 wrote: post #243
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…

Didn't read his memo, am not interested in the debate, and am not saying he should be fired or kept. That said, I'd think that he was fired not because of his opinions, but because he seems to have done an irreparable damage to Google's image: for good or bad reasons, people will react strongly and negatively to the publication of his memo, and whatever Google does -- keeps him or lets him go -- this negative impact…

[deleted]

Re: Outraged about the Google diversity memo?

#305

Post by exergy »

zimpenfish wrote: post #288
jcims wrote: post #255

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

The point he's making is that, on that graph, it is clear that many women are better at software engineering than many men. The women closer to the tip of their graph will easily beat men at the tail of theirs. Women can be very competent software engineers. That is clear to all (Sandy Metz is a great example).

But if, in general women prefer different roles, is that unimportant to you?

Re: Outraged about the Google diversity memo?

#306

Post by timgrahamtech »

syshum wrote: post #264
timgrahamtech wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then the goal is making him understand that he got fired for how he expressed those opinions. He didn't just talk to HR or his manager, he published a rant for all the world to see making it the CEO's problem. Anyone who publishes an incoherent 10 page manifesto insulting their coworkers and trashing their company's policies can reasonably expect to get fired. It doesn't matter if any of the bosses agree or disagree…

>>he published a rant for all the world to see making it the CEO's problem. Except he did not publish it, My understanding it put it on a internal system shared with a few people, other people inside google shared it more and more people inside of google until another Google Employee sent it to Motherboard or Gizmodo who published it for the world to see. So then would you support Google firing who ever sent internal…

Would he have been fired if he had instead expressed these views to his manager in a room with closed door?

I'm not aware of any executives of large institutions that are perfectly happy with leaks. They just usually aren't dumb enough to pretend that a rant like this wouldn't get leaked.

Re: Outraged about the Google diversity memo?

#307

Post by yorwba »

nailer wrote: post #265
dahart wrote: 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…

Politics, favorite foods, religion, dress sense and other ideas aren't innate. Gender, age, ethnicity and sexuality are. Hence swapping gender for politics doesn't work. Additionally Damore argued for assessing individuals as individuals rather than as tribe members and assuming discrepancy is down to bias - even if you did sub someone's chosen politics for their gender, Damore's proposed fix would still require you…

It doesn't matter whether a characteristic is innate or not; if it isn't relevant to the job, then nobody should be judged based on it. Even if you disregard that people can choose to change their gender or that politics can be inherited from the parents, gender and politics are interchangeable as far as social treatment is concerned.

If you (dis)agree with the arguments of the memo in the gender/politics-swapped version, then you should also (dis)agree with the original. Of course the cited references won't make sense anymore, but if that is your only remaining sticking point, you might have to reevaluate your opinion.

Re: Outraged about the Google diversity memo?

#308

Post by sheepmullet »

michaelchisari wrote: post #217
cm2187 wrote: post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am not sure I get your objection. It's like saying that Clinton couldn't win the election because she had far-left/communist sympathisers. I am sure she did. And I am also sure these were a marginal portion of her electoral base. I don't see how these extremists would stand in the way of a broader movement. I am not bullish on Trump long term, but not because some extremists also support him, but because of his own…

It might be important I clarify that I'm not talking about the right, I'm talking about the far right (re-branded as the "alt-right"). This does not include most people who vote Republican or consider themselves traditional conservatives. The traditional conservative movement is dying out. Quite literally, it has a demographic problem that it is not sure how to resolve. In it's place, you have the alt-right, which do…

I don't think so.

The alt-right is not constantly infighting.

The left are more likely to devolve into infighting.

This google guy was moderate left wing and the hard line social justice response from Google and the media will alienate a lot more of the intellectual left.

Hispanics and African Americans often lean socially conservative.

Gay men are a lot more fiscally conservative than you might think.

None of those groups identify with single white woman.

Etc etc.

Re: Outraged about the Google diversity memo?

#309

Post by averagewall »

timgrahamtech wrote: post #222
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…

Then the goal is making him understand that he got fired for how he expressed those opinions. He didn't just talk to HR or his manager, he published a rant for all the world to see making it the CEO's problem. Anyone who publishes an incoherent 10 page manifesto insulting their coworkers and trashing their company's policies can reasonably expect to get fired. It doesn't matter if any of the bosses agree or disagree…

> If a coworker of mine started publicly saying that I'm not genetically qualified for the work I do

Why are you changing the meaning of what he wrote? He didn't say that at all. He was very clear that he was talking about the group not any individuals.

If you choose to misunderstand what someone said, when they did a good job of explaining it clearly, then I think you shouldn't spread that misunderstanding around in a way that will hurt people, as it hurt this guy.

Re: Outraged about the Google diversity memo?

#310

Post by timgrahamtech »

js8 wrote: post #245
timgrahamtech wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then the goal is making him understand that he got fired for how he expressed those opinions. He didn't just talk to HR or his manager, he published a rant for all the world to see making it the CEO's problem. Anyone who publishes an incoherent 10 page manifesto insulting their coworkers and trashing their company's policies can reasonably expect to get fired. It doesn't matter if any of the bosses agree or disagree…

"Anyone who publishes an incoherent 10 page manifesto insulting their coworkers and trashing their company's policies can reasonably expect to get fired. It doesn't matter if any of the bosses agree or disagree with the opinions expressed; it's just an unprofessional thing to do." I agree completely. Just like these guys: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charter_77 Very unprofessional!

Ale mluvim cesky a to znam dobre. You're actually going to compare Google's hiring policies to the oppression of a eastern bloc state? Do prdel.
Post reply on HN