Live data from Hacker News

Fired Google Engineer Loses Diversity Memo Challenge

bloomberg.com

391–400 of 863 posts

Re: Fired Google Engineer Loses Diversity Memo Challenge

#391

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Team interaction is a software engineering skill. The ability to work with a diverse set of people and bring them together rather than disparaging and dividing them is a software engineering skill. I would rather have a good programmer who got along with my team than a great one that wrote such memos.

Can we differentiate between firing Damore and participating in a nation-wide metaphorical public hanging?

Re: Fired Google Engineer Loses Diversity Memo Challenge

#392

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unfortunately posting more or less the same comment in many threads just makes other people do exactly the same thing in frustration and destroys the entire comment thread with copy-paste wars. It's bad forum etiquette everywhere, not just on HN, and it ruins the conversation for everyone. > When more than one person makes the same provably false claim /shrug Right or wrong regarding the content, you're not a one-per…

I think that it's helpful to provide accurate information. And that a conversation inspired by false statements should be derailed before it strays even further into fantasyland.

/shrug

I'm not telling you what to do or that what you're saying is wrong; I'm just telling you you're being rude by doing what you're doing in the way you're doing it.

If you don't care, that's up to you.

Re: Fired Google Engineer Loses Diversity Memo Challenge

#393

Earlier quoted context omitted.

His agenda was to make Google aware of some of the consequence of their diversity politics, something they themselves had asked for feedback on. He didn't ask whether women deserved to be equals and just the fact that you think that shows just how ignorant many commentators are in this case. If you actually are interested in hearing his version of the story, not just your own wrongly informed and biased one here is a…

This is laughable. You are either extraordinarily naive or you are trying to push your own agenda, possibly both.

If I am naive it should be perfectly easy to point to where I am wrong. I am not sure what agenda exactly you think I am pushing.

Re: Fired Google Engineer Loses Diversity Memo Challenge

#394

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Team interaction is a software engineering skill. The ability to work with a diverse set of people and bring them together rather than disparaging and dividing them is a software engineering skill. I would rather have a good programmer who got along with my team than a great one that wrote such memos.

Can we differentiate between firing Damore and participating in a nation-wide metaphorical public hanging?

> Can we differentiate between firing Damore and participating in a nation-wide metaphorical public hanging?

Yes. Starting with the first is a thing that actually happened, and the second is not, so it's not worth talking about.

Re: Fired Google Engineer Loses Diversity Memo Challenge

#395
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…

That’s an untenable charitable reading of Damore’s memo. You don’t “start conversations” and “learn” by drawing conclusions, such as the lack of women in tech can be explained by genetic predispositions. And he wasn’t talking about “changes in vocabulary.” He was attacking core assumptions about what a fair society should look like. If you want to learn, you ask questions. You try to understand the other point of vie…

You strike me as reasonable. I would appreciate if you could answer a couple of questions.

1. If there are indeed biological differences between sexes that could help explain different aptitudes/predispositions for different intellectual pursuits, should it be firable to say so?

2. If boys and men are discriminated against in order to pursue equal outcomes, should they be allowed to voice opposition?

I won't challenge anyone who answers. Thank you.

Re: Fired Google Engineer Loses Diversity Memo Challenge

#396
This is one of the few subjects where much of the HN crowd is either experiencing some shared hallucination, or is relying heavily on poor journalism.

There are many comments that classify his memo as anti-diversity (it is pro diversity), and there are many that seem to suggest that the memo claimed women are less suited for these jobs, which again is patently false to anyone who gives it a reasonable and full read.

The injustice here is that this employee was taken to a workshop/seminar, was asked for feedback, which he submitted, and was ignored. His firing only came when his memo was leaked to the public and it became the subject of a media witch hunt.

Had the memo not been public, he would still be working there. This was not a planned firing and there was nothing normal about it. The CEO cancelled his vacation to return to HQ and address the situation caused by the media outcry.

This is a cancerous cultural problem that manifests the worst forms of censorious and authoritarian practices of dictatorial regimes of the past. Diversity at this cost is not worth it. Nothing is worth this kind of environment that is openly hostile and punitive to "wrongthink".

People of various backgrounds are not tokens to be planted into various positions to fulfill some fetish or misguided sense of justice. Under-representation by a specific group or sub group is not sufficient evidence of discrimination or a conspiracy. Deeming programs and opportunities unavailable to people because they don't have the correct biological trait is disgusting, and the ends do not justify the means. To argue that favoring someone because they belong to a special genetic group is rooted in the very "essentialist" thinking that is claimed to be chastised.

There is a better solution to these issues, and at this rate it will never be found. Ironic that some of the world's most innovative people who have no problem bouncing from one design pattern to another, are perfectly content with an approach to a point that criticism of it will get you fired.

Re: Fired Google Engineer Loses Diversity Memo Challenge

#397
post #364

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He literally says that those hiring practices can lower the bar. Sure, maybe he's saying that the bar for white/Asian men is higher than intended rather than that the bar for women and minorities is lower than intended, but you can't honestly argue that he isn't saying that women and minorities could be clearing a lower bar than white/Asian men.

I urge you read the memo yourself. He said Google lowers the false negative rate for women.

From a statistics point of view, this statement is dispositive: "...decrease the false negative rate, not increase the false positive rate."

The interaction between type I and type II errors virtually always have an inverse relationship. You cannot decrease one without increasing the other. It is, for example, one of the difficulties in making good medical diagnostic tests.

P.S. snarky commentary such as 'read the memo yourself', implying I'm lying about having read it, doesn't contribute to civil discussion.

Re: Fired Google Engineer Loses Diversity Memo Challenge

#398
post #370

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He literally says that those hiring practices can lower the bar. Sure, maybe he's saying that the bar for white/Asian men is higher than intended rather than that the bar for women and minorities is lower than intended, but you can't honestly argue that he isn't saying that women and minorities could be clearing a lower bar than white/Asian men.

If the hiring practices do in fact lower the bar, should he still be prohibited from saying that?

Was he?

Re: Fired Google Engineer Loses Diversity Memo Challenge

#399

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, here in "socialist Europe" he'd have been fired as well. He broke clear company rules and made the working environment hostile for others. That's not acceptable over here the same was as it's not in the US. However, had he written this out on a personal blog, or just has an adult conversation with HR I believe he'd had been safe on both sides of the pond. People don't just get fired for not doing their jobs. If I…

> If I bully a co-worker or start stating at work that I think someone is less capable for any reason linked to their biology, religion, sexuality or age I will be putting my job at risk. He didn't really say women were less capable, though (biologically or otherwise). He said that there are differences not related to capability, and that the current environment in tech is such that the work environment is more accep…

>He didn't really say women were less capable, though (biologically or otherwise).

Did you read the memo?

>>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

#400
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…

That’s an untenable charitable reading of Damore’s memo. You don’t “start conversations” and “learn” by drawing conclusions, such as the lack of women in tech can be explained by genetic predispositions. And he wasn’t talking about “changes in vocabulary.” He was attacking core assumptions about what a fair society should look like. If you want to learn, you ask questions. You try to understand the other point of vie…

You don’t “start conversations” and “learn” by drawing conclusions, such as the lack of women in tech can be explained by genetic predispositions.

No, but you can start conversations and learn by asking questions. What silences conversations and prevents learning is a menacing attitude towards to having conversations and asking questions.

He was attacking core assumptions about what a fair society should look like.

Aren't the assumptions the very things which should be questioned? If your axioms are flawed, then the systems built upon them are invalidated. Why should there be equality of outcomes? Should Asians have representation in the NBA proportional to their population percentage? Why is it that Jewish people have been radically more successful than the general population at tailoring across literally thousands of years of history, in so many different cultures and contexts? Why is there a Scandinavian Gender Equality paradox?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YKmyO3hbOz8

(Watch that video and try and tell me that the "equalists" don't come across as unreasonable, closed minded, and ideologically driven?)

A broad reading of history tells us that cultural human capital is tremendously powerful. It also gives one hope, as the historical record also indicates that cultural human capital is also transferable. The transformation of the Irish diaspora from their utter destitution to their descendant's current place in 21st century society should tell you that. (Some historians would place the average displaced Irish peasant's wealth at something like 1/2 to 1/4th that of the contemporaneous average US slave's.) Such a reading of history also demolishes the ideology of the worst segments of the Alt-Right. (As well as demolishing that of the identity politics US far-left.)

Let's call such a world view, "Cultural Primacy." Given that cultural human capital has such deep-rooted and powerful effects, what conclusions could we draw about Google's policies? It could well be that cultural human capital would have strong and persistent effects on the preferences of groups, so it would be unreasonable to expect immediate 50/50 outcomes. In fact, it would be expected for such changes to be generational, perhaps taking 2 or 3 generations. Such a world view would also emphasize the educational pipeline, and the way the subcultures of professions and fields are perceived by under-represented groups. This also happens to be in line with James Damore's suggestions from the memo. It's also entirely in line with what Google and YouTube execs have said in public:

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

Post reply on HN