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

Ask a Female Engineer: Thoughts on the Google Memo

blog.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

301–310 of 1001 posts

Re: Ask a Female Engineer: Thoughts on the Google Memo

#301

Post by AnimalMuppet »

First, a summary: There are differences between men and women. There are also barriers to entry into tech for women. Let's try to fix those, and keep trying, without necessarily expecting that we'll have 50% of engineers being women when we've finally fixed (all) the barriers.

And one detailed opinion:

On Edith's reply to "What do you disagree with or find objectionable?": She complained about having to wonder whether people she encountered on the job felt that she was qualified. I suspect that quite a few male Google employees actually feel the same fear (call it imposter syndrome). The question to me is, does she feel the same fear as men and wonder if, in her case, it's because she's female? Or does she feel additional fear because of being female? (I don't know, and I'm not going to guess. I merely observe that, if you remove the male/female aspects, what she said sounds a lot like how people describe imposter syndrome.)

Re: Ask a Female Engineer: Thoughts on the Google Memo

#302

Post by dguaraglia »

dandare wrote: post #202
dguaraglia wrote: post #85

From the article: > Nevertheless, I maintain that when I go to work, I go to work, and not to a debate club... if I remain silent, that silence could be mistaken for agreement. I should not be forced into that kind of debate at work. That, right there, is why Damore should've looked for a different outlet (and probably one that wasn't 50k+ people big) for testing his "dialectical skills." That's the very definition o…

But Google was and is a debate club - there is extensive information about Google's multiple discussion boards and lively cluture of dialectics. Why do you object/punish a single discussion that you happen to disagree with?

There's a slight difference between technical flamewars, pointed debates about expanding the amount of bathrooms available per building and Damore's post. If you can't see the difference, honestly I can't help you.

Re: Ask a Female Engineer: Thoughts on the Google Memo

#303

Post by rurounijones »

AlexCoventry wrote: post #93
Diederich wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm not making any endorsement of the comment or of the science, since it isn't my field, but just relaying what he said. Perhaps this is an off-topic question, if you don't mind responding: why did you feel the need to emphasize this, after your initial sentence: > He stated on .... Thanks!

> why did you feel the need to emphasize this Not the author, but: The psychology research literature is mostly garbage.[0] It's surprising to me that through all this, hardly anyone has dug into the supposedly scientific papers behind Damore's claims. Ultimately they come down to a massive leap of faith that job aspirations of psychology-major undergraduates can be generalized to a somehow biologically-driven prefer…

https://heterodoxacademy.org/2017/08/10/the-google-memo-what... seems to be attempting to dig into the relevant science.

Re: Ask a Female Engineer: Thoughts on the Google Memo

#304

Post by gaius »

ocdtrekkie wrote: post #290
gaius wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was fascinating to see how many Google managers operate their own "blacklists". That's got to be legally very dodgy.

That's a huge one. I can easily see anyone who operates an internal "blacklist" of other employees as creating a hostile work environment. And from my understanding, those who did posted as such under their real names, so there's no investigation needed to track down who is doing it. If there's an employee conduct we should all be able to agree is hostile, blacklisting coworkers would be it.

If I had been passed over for promotion or denied an internal transfer I was well qualified for, especially if I had gotten good performance reviews, I'd certainly be looking to have a judge subpoena those lists. That those managers felt so bold as to brag about it indicates that most of them are at it, or that they have tacit support from HR. And if I wasn't on one of the lists revealed, then we'd have to keep digging, or suspect someone had destroyed the evidence.

Re: Ask a Female Engineer: Thoughts on the Google Memo

#305

Post by dguaraglia »

kromem wrote: post #80

Can anyone cite the parts of the document where he claimed that the biological differences mapped to job performance? I read it, but definitely don't recall that association being made (he did talk a lot about preference and job satisfaction), but see numerous detractors citing that association as a criticism, so I'm a bit confused.

> he did talk a lot about preference and job satisfaction

You don't think those two things are predictors for job performance?

Re: Ask a Female Engineer: Thoughts on the Google Memo

#306

Post by notreallythough »

humanrebar wrote: post #123
tiles wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google's stance, as stated in the article, is that they divert more energy in to finding minority candidates. That's not the same as a lower bar. Abilities are expected to be distributed equally still.

In an interview, Damore said part of the "lowered bar" is extra interview rounds for minority candidates. You could call that "more energy", but it also reduces the chances that a given candidate suffers from bad luck.

Luck doesn't reduce skill, it alters opportunity.

Re: Ask a Female Engineer: Thoughts on the Google Memo

#307

Post by [deleted] »

michaelchisari wrote: post #214
aaron-lebo wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I do not think that anyone's ability to write should disbar them from discussion. We can not expect perfection from others. Instead we should try to understand them as human beings, and interpret them with generosity and kindness. You are completely right, but on the other hand if you are going to invoke "science" and you present your writing as scientific (he did), you have a higher bar. If you fail to be objective…

It seems to be completely lost on a lot of HN people that Damore's memo was not very scientific at all for the subject matter he was tackling. It was written in a certain intellectual language that often provides a veneer of authority for those who agree with his conclusions and lack the domain knowledge to understand the nuances of why he's wrong. But a lot of these "bio-truth" type of arguments do the same thing. G…

[deleted]

Re: Ask a Female Engineer: Thoughts on the Google Memo

#308

Post by mandevil »

sampo wrote: post #63

Why has this topic exploded like it did now especially in the software engineering context? Whatever talent or affinity to abstract and inanimate things we do or don't assume being correlated with gender, isn't software engineering just a lighter version, compared to mathematics and physics? Did math and physics communities already have their internal crisis/debate on these things, perhaps a decade or two ago? Or hav…

Ezra Klein argued[1] that this is really a fear of the opaque power that software has in our lives. We know that software and algorithms run the world, and that only a few people will ever even see the algorithms, let alone understand them afterwards, and yet they determine so much of the world around us. This leads everyone to fear that the wrong sort of people (for whatever definition of "wrong" you hold) are putting their thumb into the algorithm.

This is why math and physics aren't getting the same level of attention. They don't decide what news articles get viewed and what don't. They don't decide what companies can advertise to customers and what companies are beyond the pale, etc.

[1]: https://www.vox.com/new-money/2017/8/10/16119338/google-dive...

Re: Ask a Female Engineer: Thoughts on the Google Memo

#309

Post by lliamander »

dguaraglia wrote: post #246
mastazi wrote: post #185

So the takeaway is: you should become extremely proficient at writing memos and back them up with vast amounts of research, or be fired. But all of the above applies only if your memo expresses conservative ideas. I don't consider myself a conservative but I find all of this disturbing.

Maybe the takeaway is: you shouldn't write "memos" that generate a lot of noise and lost productivity in your work environment and affect your company's external image. If you have political points you want to make, go find a group of like-minded individuals and discuss with them first.

What if you think the issues you are bringing up are already a problem for the company, and the company just isn't willing to admit it?

Re: Ask a Female Engineer: Thoughts on the Google Memo

#310

Post by [deleted] »

dguaraglia wrote: post #246
mastazi wrote: post #185

So the takeaway is: you should become extremely proficient at writing memos and back them up with vast amounts of research, or be fired. But all of the above applies only if your memo expresses conservative ideas. I don't consider myself a conservative but I find all of this disturbing.

Maybe the takeaway is: you shouldn't write "memos" that generate a lot of noise and lost productivity in your work environment and affect your company's external image. If you have political points you want to make, go find a group of like-minded individuals and discuss with them first.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN