Fired Google Engineer Loses Diversity Memo Challenge • Hacker News Board

Re: Fired Google Engineer Loses Diversity Memo Challenge

#271

Post by Consultant32452 » Sat, Feb 17, 2018, 1:25 AM UTC

dejawu wrote: post #210

The way this whole thing played out makes me sad, because the guy did bring up a good point - current-day social justice leaves little avenue for well-meaning but unaware (perhaps through privilege) people to start conversations and learn about the reasons and motivations for certain efforts such as affirmative action and changes in vocabulary. Damore was indeed punished for speaking out, just as he feared. Then he s…

I feel like the progressive left THRUST Damore and anyone who might have similar thoughts/questions into the welcoming arms of the alt-right. I'm disappointed with the "Goolag" t-shirts, but he did lose his livelihood, had his professional reputation destroyed, and only a limited time to cash out. So this socially awkward nerd did what any sensible person would do, rode the wave that was sent his way the best he could. Consider his professional options compared to a standard "former Googler." They destroyed him, it was terrible.

Re: Fired Google Engineer Loses Diversity Memo Challenge

#272

Post by stcredzero » Sat, Feb 17, 2018, 1:26 AM UTC

tptacek wrote: post #220

stcredzero wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> > were discriminatory and constituted sexual harassment, notwithstanding his effort to cloak his comments with “scientific” references and analysis and notwithstanding “not all women” disclaimers. > I find this disturbing. I find this very disturbing as well. The only way that even the most ardent opponents of Damore's memo can come to a "discriminatory" and "harassment" interpretation, is to disregard a literal, f…

You can call it that if you want; then, in the US, you can be fired for "thought crime". The only thing at issue here is that you can't be fired in retaliation for workplace organizing --- but that protection doesn't apply if what you're organizing about pertains to an area where the NLRB gives deference to employers. There's a case history in the Advice Memo. They didn't make this up just for Google.

that protection doesn't apply if what you're organizing about pertains to an area where the NLRB gives deference to employers.

Those precedents exist to prevent employees from organizing active resistance to the NLRB's goals. If you read Damore's memo at face value, he's proposing modifying the way in which Google pursues those goals, taking differences in preferences into account. Strangely enough, Google and YouTube executives have spoken in public and have basically taken James Damore's memo's position and advocated the same kind of action he proposes in the memo.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VrOp8ewzJDc

Given the broad power possessed by the NLRB, how can this situation not result in a moral hazard?

Re: Fired Google Engineer Loses Diversity Memo Challenge

#273

Post by jxdxbx » Sat, Feb 17, 2018, 1:27 AM UTC

leereeves wrote: post #204

tptacek wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It doesn't matter not because the NLRB is settling the science for itself, but because the NLRB doesn't want to intervene in cases where employers enforce anti-harassment policies. There's a case history about this, cited in the memo. Remember, the presumption at law is that Google has the right to fire employees for virtually no reason (conservatives should find this congenial). Damore was attempting to avail himsel…

You're right, the NLRB isn't settling the science. It's saying that discussion of the science renders otherwise protected speech unprotected ("so harmful, discriminatory, and disruptive as to be unprotected"), and effectively removing workers' legal right to engage in science-based discussion of whether a 50/50 gender ratio is the appropriate goal.

There is no such “legal right” to discuss things in the workplace. Where do you get that from? Maybe there should be one, but there isn’t.

Re: Fired Google Engineer Loses Diversity Memo Challenge

#274

Post by leereeves » Sat, Feb 17, 2018, 1:28 AM UTC

tptacek wrote: post #247

leereeves wrote: post #237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My challenge to the NLRB's opinion is premised on the idea that Google employees have a right to discuss Google's diversity policy. The NLRB seems to agree, repeatedly saying that Damore's memo contained protected speech. But when that discussion brings up unpleasant scientific findings, the NLRB and I diverge; IMO a scientific explanation should not render otherwise protected speech unprotected.

The issue isn't that the science is unpleasant. It's that state and federal law compel companies like Google to maintain anti-harassment policies, and the NLRB defers to the company on how they're enforced. If you want to complain about Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, that's a different discussion; it's not really fair to take the NLRB to task for that.

The issue is that referring to these scientific results is "harassment" because they are unpleasant.

Re: Fired Google Engineer Loses Diversity Memo Challenge

#275

Post by bduerst » Sat, Feb 17, 2018, 1:29 AM UTC

moduspol wrote: post #268

bduerst wrote: post #230

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>This is a statement of women's choices, not their ability. Wrong. The memo is poorly worded, but it does make the leap from just preferences to abilities in this sentence, despite not having evidence for the latter: >>I’m simply stating that the distribution of preferences and abilities of men and women differ in part due to biological causes and that these differences may explain why we don’t see equal representati…

Abilities follow from preferences at the level being discussed (potential hiring pool at Google). I am not good at being a nurse because I chose to become a software developer. I chose to become a software developer because I prefer working with computers over people. My preference in adolescence resulted in my being more capable as a software developer for a company like Google. That this one statement keeps getting…

>That this one statement keeps getting taken out of context and misinterpreted

Wrong again. When you look at the full context, Damore specifically says that it's not socially constructed like you're describing. Damore isn't arguing that women lack the ability for tech or leadership because they prefer to be nurses, his argument stems from biological differences:

>> On average, men and women biologically differ in many ways. These differences aren’t just socially constructed because:

>> ● They’re universal across human cultures

>> ● They often have clear biological causes and links to prenatal testosterone

>> ● Biological males that were castrated at birth and raised as females often still identify and act like males

>> ● The underlying traits are highly heritable

>> ● They’re exactly what we would predict from an evolutionary psychology perspective

>> Note, I’m not saying that all men differ from all women in the following ways or that these differences are “just.” I’m simply stating that the distribution of preferences and abilities of men and women differ in part due to biological causes and that these differences may explain why we don’t see equal representation of women in tech and leadership.

Re: Fired Google Engineer Loses Diversity Memo Challenge

#276

Post by tclancy » Sat, Feb 17, 2018, 1:31 AM UTC

Consultant32452 wrote: post #271

dejawu wrote: post #210

The way this whole thing played out makes me sad, because the guy did bring up a good point - current-day social justice leaves little avenue for well-meaning but unaware (perhaps through privilege) people to start conversations and learn about the reasons and motivations for certain efforts such as affirmative action and changes in vocabulary. Damore was indeed punished for speaking out, just as he feared. Then he s…

I feel like the progressive left THRUST Damore and anyone who might have similar thoughts/questions into the welcoming arms of the alt-right. I'm disappointed with the "Goolag" t-shirts, but he did lose his livelihood, had his professional reputation destroyed, and only a limited time to cash out. So this socially awkward nerd did what any sensible person would do, rode the wave that was sent his way the best he coul…

He has no agency? He chose to speak up and then he chose to go down the path he did. It is an impressive feat of mental gymnastics to both kinda sorta acknowledge the alt-right might not be a great group of guys but then also claim Damore had no choice but to pull into that port in a storm of his own making. Allow me to pour out a beaker of Soylent for the poor, downtrodden white man.

Re: Fired Google Engineer Loses Diversity Memo Challenge

#277

Post by eridius » Sat, Feb 17, 2018, 1:31 AM UTC

Consultant32452 wrote: post #271

dejawu wrote: post #210

The way this whole thing played out makes me sad, because the guy did bring up a good point - current-day social justice leaves little avenue for well-meaning but unaware (perhaps through privilege) people to start conversations and learn about the reasons and motivations for certain efforts such as affirmative action and changes in vocabulary. Damore was indeed punished for speaking out, just as he feared. Then he s…

I feel like the progressive left THRUST Damore and anyone who might have similar thoughts/questions into the welcoming arms of the alt-right. I'm disappointed with the "Goolag" t-shirts, but he did lose his livelihood, had his professional reputation destroyed, and only a limited time to cash out. So this socially awkward nerd did what any sensible person would do, rode the wave that was sent his way the best he coul…

> but he did lose his livelihood, had his professional reputation destroyed, and only a limited time to cash out.

Why are you writing this in the passive, as if this is an unfortunate thing that happened to him? He did all of that to himself. That memo created a hostile workplace and Google had no choice but to fire him. The outcome here isn't terrible, it's exactly what should have happened.

Re: Fired Google Engineer Loses Diversity Memo Challenge

#278

Post by stcredzero » Sat, Feb 17, 2018, 1:34 AM UTC

Consultant32452 wrote: post #271

dejawu wrote: post #210

The way this whole thing played out makes me sad, because the guy did bring up a good point - current-day social justice leaves little avenue for well-meaning but unaware (perhaps through privilege) people to start conversations and learn about the reasons and motivations for certain efforts such as affirmative action and changes in vocabulary. Damore was indeed punished for speaking out, just as he feared. Then he s…

I feel like the progressive left THRUST Damore and anyone who might have similar thoughts/questions into the welcoming arms of the alt-right. I'm disappointed with the "Goolag" t-shirts, but he did lose his livelihood, had his professional reputation destroyed, and only a limited time to cash out. So this socially awkward nerd did what any sensible person would do, rode the wave that was sent his way the best he coul…

he did lose his livelihood, had his professional reputation destroyed

I'm frankly ashamed at the behavior of my classmates, who were so enthusiastically throwing him under the bus, without really knowing anything about him. I found it very odd that people who had no basis of judging his software engineering skills had very strong opinions about them.

I'm reminded of a documentary film about North Korea, where during one segment of a meeting, people went up to the front of the room and took turns condemning the United States, and were cheered the more fanatical they sounded. There is indeed "thought-crime" in the United States, and this category is at times conveniently expanded to to encompass any questioning of the new orthodoxy at all, with no basis but irrational, emotional ones.

Re: Fired Google Engineer Loses Diversity Memo Challenge

#279

Post by jxdxbx » Sat, Feb 17, 2018, 1:34 AM UTC

leereeves wrote: post #237

tptacek wrote: post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe? Most of the challenges on this thread seem to be premised on the idea that Google needs ironclad justification to terminate an employee. The opposite is true. We have, as conservatives vigorously argued for, at-will employment in pretty much the whole country. The NLRA will protect your right to improve workplace conditions. The NLRB will not enforce that right if what you're doing isn't really about workplace…

My challenge to the NLRB's opinion is premised on the idea that Google employees have a right to discuss Google's diversity policy. The NLRB seems to agree, repeatedly saying that Damore's memo contained protected speech. But when that discussion brings up unpleasant scientific findings, the NLRB and I diverge; IMO a scientific explanation should not render otherwise protected speech unprotected.

Google employees do not have a right to discuss Google’s diversity policy. That does not fall within the “improving workplace conditions” exception. Google is within its rights to simply fire all conservatives if it wants to.

I think labor law should be different, but it’s not.

Re: Fired Google Engineer Loses Diversity Memo Challenge

#280

Post by tptacek » Sat, Feb 17, 2018, 1:34 AM UTC

stcredzero wrote: post #272

tptacek wrote: post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can call it that if you want; then, in the US, you can be fired for "thought crime". The only thing at issue here is that you can't be fired in retaliation for workplace organizing --- but that protection doesn't apply if what you're organizing about pertains to an area where the NLRB gives deference to employers. There's a case history in the Advice Memo. They didn't make this up just for Google.

that protection doesn't apply if what you're organizing about pertains to an area where the NLRB gives deference to employers. Those precedents exist to prevent employees from organizing active resistance to the NLRB's goals. If you read Damore's memo at face value, he's proposing modifying the way in which Google pursues those goals, taking differences in preferences into account. Strangely enough, Google and YouTub…

What broad power are you referring to? Without the NLRB, Damore would have no recourse under "protected concerted action". He was an at-will employee.

It's Google, it seems to me, that has the broad power --- and that's a situation conservatives brought about.