Sundar Pichai Should Resign as Google’s C.E.O • Hacker News Board

Re: Sundar Pichai Should Resign as Google’s C.E.O

#391

Post by dahart » Fri, Aug 11, 2017, 6:39 PM UTC

endorphone wrote: post #378

dahart wrote: post #371

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The IQ distribution of men and women is slightly different, and this is essentially settled science How different? Can you source this claim? Are the means & medians at different places? How far apart are they? Are they far enough part to justify a male/female ratio in the tech workforce of 4x? I'm not arguing with you, but you are contradicting the article at hand. "the mainstream view is that male and female abil…

The difference between male and female IQ curves is easily found, and is scientifically settled. I don't particularly care if I'm contradicting the article at hand -- I'm not trying to vouch for it, but am saying that it's a rational discussion. >Please source this wildly inaccurate claim. I said for several decades. You cite the change for over five decades. From 1990 to today -- closing on three decades -- women in…

> The difference between male and female IQ curves is easily found, and is scientifically settled.

Can you either source this or summarize, assuming that I genuinely want to know? How big is the difference in mean & median? Do you believe the difference is primarily responsible for the difference in distribution?

> I said for several decades. You cite the change for over five decades.

You're going to nitpick over 3 vs 5? Are you saying that the distribution of women wasn't in a steady state in the 1970's but it reached steady state in the 1990's, and that now the distributions are primarily reflective of innate biology and not social causes?

The distribution of women in computer science is quite different than the distribution of women in engineering - very roughly 2x as I understand. Do you think that computer science is significantly and measurably more prone to being affected by our biological differences than engineering?

I'm think I'm bringing up reasonable points, is it really a stretch to ask about different countries and different disciplines? The memo's reasoning should reasonably apply to all women in all businesses in all countries, not just engineering or tech. He even cited gender discrepancies that are cross-cultural, this is absolutely fair game.

> You seem to be taking the shotgun approach, and seem wholly ingenuine in discussing this rationally

I'm sorry that it's getting tough for you. I'm very genuine and very serious. I disagree that I'm being irrational, but you are entitled to your opinion.

I'm just hearing defensiveness about the claims stated as fact being true. I willingly accept that there are biological differences between men and women. What I don't see clearly is a rational justification for ignoring cultural sexism.

Re: Sundar Pichai Should Resign as Google’s C.E.O

#392

Post by peoplewindow » Fri, Aug 11, 2017, 6:40 PM UTC

ghaff wrote: post #226

WalterSear wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He didn't circulate one. He sent it to a mailing list which purported to be a safe place for open, honest sharing of opinions regarding diversity and hiring.

Anyone who is willing to bet their job on a controversial posting about company policy to a broad company mailing list staying internal either doesn't mind being fired or is an idiot.

Google always used to make a big song and dance about how scientific and data driven it is. They even wrote about how data driven their hiring processes and HR operations are.

This article from 2013 is an example

http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/technology/2013/01/...

“What we try to do is bring the same level of rigor to people decisions that we do to engineering decisions. Our mission is to have all people decisions be informed by data.”

Damore's memo may look idiotic to people who work in "normal" workplaces, but it is consistent with Google's previous rhetoric on what sort of company it wants to be: namely, one that isn't normal.

Re: Sundar Pichai Should Resign as Google’s C.E.O

#393

Post by KirinDave » Fri, Aug 11, 2017, 6:42 PM UTC

stagbeetle wrote: post #364

KirinDave wrote: post #315

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right, but anyone familiar with this larger discussion read James's memo and knew, immediately, that he simply failed to do any research or contribute anything meaningful. I certainly did my best to ignore it. It was poorly informed, poorly considered. His firing was inevitable and possibly even what he wanted. Certainly I can't imagine a more effective way to get fired at Google. Since James didn't do the courtesy o…

To be frank, it's called being the better man. Progress isn't made when both parties refuse to cooperate. And one side isn't absolved of responsibility just because they believe the other side to be not worth their effort. This is petty.

What do you think I am doing engaging this topic even though it's obviously time consuming and costly to me?

I'm not here dropping links about stereotypes and pointing out trivial logical errors in the discourse because it's good for my heart or my psyche.

I'm on Twitter hiatus, but I still end up wrapped in these fruitless conflicts. But please, continue arguing that what I'm doing is deleterious. I'm not friendly on this subject, but you can hardly accuse me of not engaging openly and being responsive to the dialogue.

Re: Sundar Pichai Should Resign as Google’s C.E.O

#394

Post by humanrebar » Fri, Aug 11, 2017, 6:43 PM UTC

bduerst wrote: post #343

humanrebar wrote: post #338

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Saying someone has racist ideas is a loaded accusation. I think it's fair to ask for elaboration. > ...jumps into observable personality differences, which are not proven to be biologically driven. Some personality differences in populations are supported by some studies. He cites studies about personal interests, for example. It's possible that he goes too far (scientifically speaking) with some conjecture, but he w…

>Saying someone has racist ideas is a loaded accusation. I think it's fair to ask for elaboration. Except I didn't accuse James of having racist ideas , I pointed out that his opinions are toxic to his coworkers. I'm not sure what you're getting at. It's true that he attempts to check himself throughout the paper, but it's contradictory because he then proceeds to take it too far. It's the equivalent of saying, "I'm…

"Racist ideas" was the wrong term to use. That was a typo. Apologies.

Is "sexist ideas" fair? "Bigoted ideas"? That seems to be the implication when labeling ideas about gender "toxic". The colloquial language around this sort of thing is imprecise. That brings me to my next point:

> ...and then demonstrating he's not for diversity by arguing against it.

The paper seems contradictory because people have definitions in mind for words like "diversity". But not everyone has the same definitions in mind. He can be for diversity of thought and want to encourage that with discussion of structural changes while still preferring a world with more women in tech. This position is not the Google HR definition of "diversity", but it's clearly part of his idea of diversity.

Re: Sundar Pichai Should Resign as Google’s C.E.O

#395

Post by yorwba » Fri, Aug 11, 2017, 6:44 PM UTC

nobodyman wrote: post #370

Ajedi32 wrote: post #275

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why even bother mentioning biology then if there are other influences more important and relevant? It seemed very emphasized. Because that portion of the essay was meant to counter what the author perceived to be Google's current position on the matter: that societal factors are the _only_ factor resulting in a lower percentage of women in tech. From the memo: > For the rest of this document, I’ll concentrate on th…

> The author isn't saying that biological differences are the _only_ factor; only that that they are _a_ factor... This is true, but as /u/taysic pointed out elsewhere, Damore dedicates the majority of his memo on this this one factor and wishes to change corporate policy because of it. > ... and that Google has been completely neglecting that factor with the current implementation of their efforts to improve diversi…

> Perhaps Google is evaluating more factors than Damore? Perhaps Google concluded that social issues and gender bias play a larger role in workforce disparity than biological issues, and therefore decided to prioritize attacking the larger problem over the smaller problem?

If Google has done the research on it, I'd really like to see because it is likely to be much more extensive than what this one guy has collected in his free time. That said, I suspect bias was simply assumed as the major factor by default, since that has historically been true in lots of professions (some of which are now dominated by women).

Re: Sundar Pichai Should Resign as Google’s C.E.O

#396

Post by humanrebar » Fri, Aug 11, 2017, 6:45 PM UTC

thegayngler wrote: post #372

humanrebar wrote: post #338

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Saying someone has racist ideas is a loaded accusation. I think it's fair to ask for elaboration. > ...jumps into observable personality differences, which are not proven to be biologically driven. Some personality differences in populations are supported by some studies. He cites studies about personal interests, for example. It's possible that he goes too far (scientifically speaking) with some conjecture, but he w…

> ...but he was careful to say that properties of large populations don't apply on the level of an individual or selected group. Then why bring it up if what he says doesn't matter within the context in which they are hiring people. Google isn't hiring people on a population basis. They are hiring people on an individual basis.

They are drawing candidates from populations. He's arguing the problem could be upstream from Google HR practices. As in, there aren't enough women applying (I don't think that's controversial). He elaborating on his answer to "Why not?"

Re: Sundar Pichai Should Resign as Google’s C.E.O

#397

Post by peoplewindow » Fri, Aug 11, 2017, 6:45 PM UTC

taysic wrote: post #190

richardknop wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some people who are outraged by this are people who are afraid to live in a society where you can be fired and your career ruined for having a political opinion (not even controversial one).

I really don't care what political opinion my coworkers have. But if they feel called to publish a memo about company policy that affects me due to this political opinion - it better be a very open discussion in such a way that they can't get the last word. I also question if a drawn out debate (which it should be) would be a waste of company time. Also this one was very controversial.

Anything you don't like will seem to be controversial. To other people - like me - the idea that males and females like different things is so obvious it is insane this debate is even being had at all. Even 10 year olds will tell you that girls like dollhouses and boys like trucks and toy guns and things. It's only after people fall into the grip of bizarre extreme feminist ideology that they start to believe that pointing out differences between men and women is offensive and controversial.

The memo in question would not have affected you, would it? Unless you're saying you were hired to fit a diversity quota and shouldn't be there at all. Even if management had agreed 100% it could only have led to changes in hiring processes, and maybe men turning up to classes and events where they were previously banned. I assume you're OK with that.

Re: Sundar Pichai Should Resign as Google’s C.E.O

#398

Post by KirinDave » Fri, Aug 11, 2017, 6:47 PM UTC

pharrington wrote: post #352

KirinDave wrote: post #321

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is not irrational to misinterpret poorly written, poorly worded, and inconclusive text. Reading a text is a dialogue. If the writer did not appropriately express the intent, then they invite the reader to finish the thought. And this even rational people can arrive at different conclusions. To suggest every reading you don't approve of as "irrational" is a predictable, even classical tactic. Many words exist for i…

You said "his point was poorly delivered precisely because it leaves open such radical room for misrepresenting it," and then contrasted how "mobs of liberals" are reading it with "MRA/goreans." Maybe I'm misinterpreting you, but your original post was explicitly about irrational misinterpretations. If you want to talk about how the memo was poorly written, talk about how the memo was poorly written. The readings of…

> The memo begins with it's intent, and even has a TLDR after the opening three paragraphs.

Which does little to excuse the subsequent content. Why would it? Impact matters far more than intent. Asking for someone to read a paragraph in a light quite opposed to it's content in this era of Poe Principle Supremacy is essentially asking for an act of faith.

I possess no such faith. And why should I? The implicit suggestion here is that James's memo had value or novel input. Even if I fastidiously follow his intent statement, it appears misinformed and to misinterpret some findings, offering a solution I have discussed as inadequate and insulting many times on this website.

> If you actually read the memo, and have actual problems with what was actually written, then talk about that.

I have at length. I am now talking about the discourse at hand. Please find someone else to make demands of. I'm not your conversational sparring partner and even this reply is only a courtesy. Please do not exhaust my good will.

Re: Sundar Pichai Should Resign as Google’s C.E.O

#399

Post by dahart » Fri, Aug 11, 2017, 6:48 PM UTC

dropstickle wrote: post #386

dahart wrote: post #365

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Clearly not. Does 60% of Americans being overweight today mean that it's likely that 60% of people are naturally and biologically incapable of maintaining a healthy weight? There are genetic differences among underweight and overweight populations, so it is "possible" that the distribution of healthy weights to overweight people is natural a result of those genetic traits, and not the result of advertising and availa…

I think you misunderstood me. I was not making a biological correlation, but a statistical one; namely that group averages doesn't say anything about an individual. The nature/nurture debate of overweight people is besides the point.

Then I think you misunderstood the memo. The memo is making a biological correlation. It suggests that the current distributions might accurately reflect differences in biology.

Nature vs nurture is completely the point here, Damore argued that nature is the primary force, not nurture, and therefore we should stop nurturing women in tech.

Re: Sundar Pichai Should Resign as Google’s C.E.O

#400

Post by yorwba » Fri, Aug 11, 2017, 6:51 PM UTC

lucozade wrote: post #334

daenz wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>That man's argument was not science. It wasn't. There was absolutely no scientific evidence behind his argument. He misrepresented studied, and he cherry picked what he wanted. I want to follow up on this, can you give an example? From what little I know, it's essentially settled science that men and women have statistically different interests, and those interests exist across all cultures (implying a biological ca…

The problem isn't with the science, it's with the misuse of the science to add apparent credence to flawed logic. So yes, across humanity there are statistical gender differences to the choices people make. The flaw in the logic is that that doesn't means Google shouldn't act on bias in its selection and retention policies. What it may well mean is that Google may need to mitigate the cultural biases both internally…

> But whether they should or not should be a question about what's in the best interest of the company as a whole.

That reminds me of something I read recently:

For each of these changes, we need principled reasons for why it helps Google; that is, we should be optimizing for Google—with Google's diversity being a component of that.

Can you guess where I read that? (Hint: It was written by James Damore).

Now it just so happens that I disagree with that opinion, because it appears to remove the corporation's decision making from any moral considerations, leaving only profit. But it appears to be a point where you agree with the memo author.