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

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

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

501–507 of 507 posts

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

#501

Post by taysic »

peoplewindow wrote: post #150
taysic wrote: post #124

"He could have wrestled with the tension between population-level research and individual experience. He could have stood up for the free flow of information." Honestly I don't agree. It's his job to facilitate an enjoyable work environment not be a champion of free speech. Free speech is plentiful outside the workplace. If you want to contact HR go for it. But the person who wrote the memo opened a can of worms impl…

> It's his job to facilitate an enjoyable work environment not be a champion of free speech Obviously he hasn't been doing that. Lots of Googlers apparently feel like they can't speak out on topics that might offend hard-left sensibilities. > Women want to be respected by their coworkers and arguments like "biologically we've hit the max amount of women who are interested in this field" don't align with our experienc…

So just because theories are "evidence-free" or too hard to make studies around, they are untrue?

My experience should count for something because I am actually a woman in tech, who loves to code, who started my own successful tech business. People like me should be a vocal part of the discussion because we're a minority who has some first hand insight. Studies have been shown time and time again to sometimes create conclusions from biased premises, to make the wrong conclusions, or simply be contradictory to a dozen other studies.

Not to say they are always wrong. I have no reason to believe biology plays no role but I personally don't believe it plays a significant role.

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

#502

Post by gammarator »

endorphone wrote: post #142
agentultra wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> By firing him they made him a hero to enormous groups, To a small, vocal group. > By doing it in an anti-science, anti-evidence way There were good reasons for doing it that had nothing to do with science or evidence. There are women working at Google who do not need to be reminded of the genetic and biologic differences they have from their cishet male counterparts. If Damon had issues with the policies at Google…

There are women working at Google who do not need to be reminded of the genetic and biologic differences they have from their cishet male counterparts. I'm a white male. I know that the average Asian has a higher IQ than the average white man. This means positively nothing when comparing me with a given Asian, however. That is the root of this discussion that so many so profoundly miss. The average Google male is not…

1) Google does not hire by sampling at random from a population above an IQ cutoff; you are misusing statistical ideas. http://crookedtimber.org/2017/08/11/from-a-logical-point-of-...

2) "IQ" (or math ability, or whatever) does not measure if someone is an effective engineer, which is what Google actually wants.

3) Women are also underrepresented throughout software engineering, at places far less rarified than Google. You don't have to be a genius to write a CRUD app--but somehow it's still mostly dudes. I wonder if there could be any other effects that would discourage women from taking those jobs?

4) Have you ever asked a women in tech--any woman, grab the nearest one--if she's had negative experiences in tech? Say, being dismissed, ignored, talked over, harassed?

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

#503

Post by gammarator »

charrondev wrote: post #276
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…

You won’t get one. I’ve yet to see anyone serious even attempting to debunk that claim, and I doubt it will happen here.

Here's a few expert perspectives you can start with: http://nymag.com/selectall/2017/08/some-scientific-arguments...

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

#504

Post by clavalle »

novembermike wrote: post #462
clavalle wrote: post #452

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's strange to me that people don't recognize the disconnect within the memo itself: Basically, it starts off by saying 'Statistics of the general population don't have anything to say about individuals.' Then turns around and says 'Here's a bunch of statistics on the general population that show why there are fewer individuals in various sought after positions.' It's like a spouse saying "I know being poor doesn't…

An individual is an individual. Individuals make up a group. You can apply statistics to individuals in a way that you can't apply to an individual. I'm repeating the word to make a point. Your second quote might say "individuals" but it's talking about a group.

But you can't apply the statistics backward.

Say you have a population of 10,000. You can come to some meaningful statistical conclusions about that group.

If you consciously pick 100 individuals from that original population you also have a group, it's true. But you can't use the conclusions from the first group on the second, much smaller, group.

You can discover some new statically valid facts on the new group -- they may even be similar to the original statistics -- but that is far from a given.

The only thing you can reasonably say is that the new group will fall somewhere in the domain of the original measurements.

Unless, of course, the new group is chosen at random or semi-random in regards to the measured characteristics, in which case you can have some sort of expectation for the new group and even measure (statistically) the amount of randomness.

But when it comes to the question at hand: ability to handle stress, high achievement potential, leadership talent -- these are all things I would assume Google chooses non-randomly from the overall general population pool. So there is no reason to think the relevant characteristics of the small sub set should show any similarity to the general population at all for these characteristics especially when the differences in the general population are relatively small.

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

#505

Post by peoplewindow »

taysic wrote: post #500
peoplewindow wrote: post #397

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 po…

I disagree with your assessment because I haven't been exposed to extreme feminist philosophy but rather I'm speaking from my experience as a woman in tech, who loves to code, from the wisdom of my personal journey. Ok women are more likely to like doll houses as little kids - but I don't know many women working with doll houses as adults? Women are completely capable of doing anything they want to do. Professions li…

I really don't understand your position at all, sorry.

You agree with Damore that the underlying issue is interest, not capability.

You say that biological influences on this are "not compelling enough to convince you of anything". Fine, but you offer no alternative explanation for why men find coding more interesting than women. If you have no better explanation, then the scientific papers that do provide an explanation would seem to take precedence, no?

You agree that women are more likely to like dollhouses than boys as children. But you haven't noticed or don't see the connection between what girls play with as children (dolls of babies, people) and the dominance of primary school education by girls? To me the connection is obvious. Girls are more interested in such jobs.

Finally, you say memos like Damore's are controversial if they're used to affect company policy because the problem it addresses is abstract and with many factors going into it. But this is not sufficient to make a memo controversial. Executives write memos on abstract and multi-faceted topics every day: the nature of the digital revolution, how best to motivate their workforce, etc. These memos are all designed to influence company policy around abstract topics.

So what you really mean when you say that Damore's memo is inappropriate for a workplace to be "going there" is that you wish to ban discussion of any gender diversity policies that are not Google's existing diversity policies. These policies are extreme, quite likely illegal and at the very least unfair to men.

This is why I described your views as extreme feminist. I know it won't seem that way to you, but feeling that nobody should even be allowed to voice disagreement to diversity policies - not even by citing science - simply because you feel it's "inappropriate"? That is to me an extremist position. It is the embodiment of intolerance.

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

#506

Post by endorphone »

gammarator wrote: post #502
endorphone wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are women working at Google who do not need to be reminded of the genetic and biologic differences they have from their cishet male counterparts. I'm a white male. I know that the average Asian has a higher IQ than the average white man. This means positively nothing when comparing me with a given Asian, however. That is the root of this discussion that so many so profoundly miss. The average Google male is not…

1) Google does not hire by sampling at random from a population above an IQ cutoff; you are misusing statistical ideas. http://crookedtimber.org/2017/08/11/from-a-logical-point-of-... 2) "IQ" (or math ability, or whatever) does not measure if someone is an effective engineer, which is what Google actually wants. 3) Women are also underrepresented throughout software engineering, at places far less rarified than Googl…

Your first points are nonsensical and requires that we believe that technical/problem solving skills and IQ have no correlation, when actual reality demonstrates a very strong correlation. Not a perfect correlation, obviously, but very high.

Your third point again is based on a bogus premise. To get those CRUD jobs the developers often went through a gauntlet of CS (or shining independently through projects, etc), hiring selectivity (everyone hires the "top 2%", etc). Even if the job is banal, the road to get there is often very demanding.

As to your fourth, I have no doubt that many women in tech have negative experiences. Having said that, many males in tech have negative experiences. I'm a fairly outgoing, obstinate, outspoken type of person and I know in my career I've left a wake of male coworkers who were dismissed and talked over. This industry tends to be hierarchical, and when it's a male that's life, and when it's a female that's sexism.

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

#507

Post by CheckHook »

angry_napkin wrote: post #489
ltrcola wrote: post #472

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not convinced. His repeated use of the words "echo chamber" seems fairly indicative of his views, and I don't think it simply leans conservative. This is all just conjecture though. But either way, if he didn't take the money and went public it would turn out worse for Google, possibly even legally. They really took the only action they could, in my opinion.

It’s suspiciously alt-right in tone. I wouldn’t be surprised to learn he posts or follows t_d

Using the phrase "echo chamber" doesn't make you alt-right, suggesting so just closes down an avenue of discussion which then leads to more division.
Post reply on HN