Live data from Hacker News

Outraged about the Google diversity memo?

backreaction.blogspot.com

481–490 of 872 posts

Re: Outraged about the Google diversity memo?

#481
post #389

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is the freedom to negotiate, and the freedom to leave. Comparing it to Stalinism is silly, and surely disrespects the millions of people who genuinely suffered and died under Stalin.

OP's quotation is not speaking of freedom generally , which you are; it is speaking of freedom within the corporation, i.e., you are there and you do not leave. >Comparing it to Stalinism is silly, and surely disrespects No, making a comparison of abstract forms of government is not in any way disrespectful to people who lived under a regime. It can only be construed as disrespectful if you are looking for an emotion…

By exercising your freedom to negotiate and threatening to use your freedom to leave, you can attempt to cause changes in the corporation.

Please don't attempt to tell me that I know my argument is bad.

Re: Outraged about the Google diversity memo?

#482
People are making way too big a deal of genetic predisposition. Yes, there are genetic predispositions, like how musical talent may run through some families, but what matters way more is how we are brought up, and how we choose to act. If someone is a musical virtuoso, they became that way not because of the talent they were born with, but because of the encouragement of their parents and environment and long hours of practice they chose to put in.

Young minds are impressionable, and if you tell a young person they're probably less capable of something, they probably will be. Even as the stereotypical nerdy white male programmer I can see how people look differently at a young girl who is interested in computers. It is considered odd, if not improper. Boys never have to contend with this bias (although they have similar yet opposite biases in different fields, like child care). Inevitably this societal pressure will cause fewer girls to go into programming, and in turn fewer women to end up at google. That's not a consequence of some genetic predisposition, it is a consequence of being brought up in a world where not everyone is treated equally.

How do you flip that around? You stop thinking in terms of averages and you start thinking in terms of individual opportunity. We treat every child as deserving of the same chances as any other child, and we stop trying to steer them into directions based on their birth. That requires a modal shift in thinking where gender is just not a factor anymore, for any profession or any talent.

The diversity memo's failing is not the statistics it cites, it is that it furthers the notion that diversity is a set of statistics to control for. True diversity is about ignoring statistics and instead giving every single person the same chances, regardless of where they came from. I want my daughter to have the same chance of becoming a programmer as my son, and my son to have the same chance of becoming a kindergarten teacher as my daughter, and for no one to tell them either choice is odd or improper.

Re: Outraged about the Google diversity memo?

#483
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?

Why does it matter which trait this describes? Surely this demonstrates that averages don't matter for how a trait is expressed in individuals, no matter how it's distributed in different groups?

Re: Outraged about the Google diversity memo?

#484
post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Whether we agree with the memo or not, there was a very good point that guy made and that we should keep in mind, it's the paragraph with the two overlapping distributions. Even if you admit that all genders, races, any way you want to segment the population, do not have the same distribution, that doesn't mean anything to a person as an individual. For instance I think it's fair to say that black people are better a…

> fair to say that black people are better at athleticism/running Is it fair though? Is it supported by metrics of muscle strength and length etc? And does it take into account the differences between blacks (Africans?), west vs south vs central (pygmies!). Also, there's the possibility that whites of equivalent athleticism find better options for their life than being a professional sportsmen, the bottom 80% [1] of…

[deleted]

Re: Outraged about the Google diversity memo?

#485
post #438

I am sorry if I come across as a liberal who gets offended, but I completely support the decision of Google to fire him. In fact, I think that Google had no other choice than to fire him, and that's mostly because the engineer shot himself in the foot. Memos are not meant to express debatable personal arguments, memos are meant to express a company position. By widely spreading a personal view, the author impersonate…

If it's forbidden to even propose a possible explanation, how can anyone ever seriously discuss the question of why engineering isn't 50/50 male/female?

But then, I suppose that's the point. No competition for the equally unprovable, unquantifiable theory that's currently dominant.

Re: Outraged about the Google diversity memo?

#486
post #424
post #402

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A former senator and secretary of state - complete and utter incompetence - sure whatever you say snowflake.

I'm sure you're trolling, but... Her credentials worked against her. She was as establishment as you can be, with no perspective on any major change from the viewpoint of the average person, just continuing on down the existing path. The reason Trump got elected is the same reason Obama got elected, and it is the same reason Bush Jr. got elected, and Clinton before him: people want change.

I think you're underestimating the damage the DNC did when they screwed over Sanders. A lot of the traditional democrats I know simply refused to vote after that. Sanders also offered the change you're talking about.

Re: Outraged about the Google diversity memo?

#487
post #438

I am sorry if I come across as a liberal who gets offended, but I completely support the decision of Google to fire him. In fact, I think that Google had no other choice than to fire him, and that's mostly because the engineer shot himself in the foot. Memos are not meant to express debatable personal arguments, memos are meant to express a company position. By widely spreading a personal view, the author impersonate…

Here as a conservative, I do think Google had the right to fire him. I don't agree with the decision, but I don't need to. It's not my company.

On that note, I don't think the memo was intended to speak for Google, but rather _to_ Google. Was it even intentionally public? Or was it leaked?

Re: Outraged about the Google diversity memo?

#488
post #362

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Yes, because it is the same argument. The GP didn't talk about about hiring policies, he talked about institutional criticism. The subject of the criticism is irrelevant.

That's an insult to Jan Palach. I doubt any of the critics of Google have the same level of conviction.

Re: Outraged about the Google diversity memo?

#489
post #482

People are making way too big a deal of genetic predisposition. Yes, there are genetic predispositions, like how musical talent may run through some families, but what matters way more is how we are brought up, and how we choose to act. If someone is a musical virtuoso, they became that way not because of the talent they were born with, but because of the encouragement of their parents and environment and long hours…

"The diversity memo's failing is not the statistics it cites, it is that it furthers the notion that diversity is a set of statistics to control for. True diversity is about ignoring statistics and instead giving every single person the same chances, regardless of where they came from."

Your point is the memo failed because it makes exactly your point - that people should be treated like individuals rather than their group's statistical means.

I'm curious if you've even read it.

Re: Outraged about the Google diversity memo?

#490

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s not that someone would switch to the alt-right, it’s that the definition of belief is moving the line so others are defining you as alt-right. As an example, Ben Shapiro is by statements and beliefs not alt-right. He was attacked by them quite a bit. Yet, people have started calling him alt-right in media and forums. I too would never cross that line, but I believe others will be happy to redraw that line regard…

"Alt-right" means "Nazi" now. It didn't always. Somebody dragged Richard Spencer out from whatever rock he lives under and into the public eye, specifically for the purpose of changing that meaning - or, as you have it, moving that line.

Really? From Wikipedia:

"Spencer and others have said that he created the term 'alt-right', which he considers a movement about white identity. Breitbart News described Spencer's website AlternativeRight.com as 'a center of alt-right thought.'"

This matches with what I know. White supremacy was also featured prominently in the sidebar of /r/altright before it was banned.

Post reply on HN