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

Fired Google Engineer Loses Diversity Memo Challenge

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

431–440 of 863 posts

Re: Fired Google Engineer Loses Diversity Memo Challenge

#431

Post by bduerst »

aianus wrote: post #403
bduerst wrote: post #269

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except he said women also lacked the abilities to be in tech and higher level management positions. This isn't just about children picking toys. >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.

It is entirely uncontroversial and well-supported to say that there are many more extremely stupid, or criminal, or violent, or genetically ill men than women at the bottom of the bell curve. Why is it so unbelievable that there are more men at the other end with extremely high ability? Just the fact that we have two different chromosomes X and Y is enough to increase our genetic variance (because if a gene on the X…

It's not so much as unbelievable as in the burden of proof is not met for causation.

Observational correlation does not mean causation. It's analogous to how a racist would argue that because there are more african american men in U.S. prisons, they are there because they are biologically inferior - when in reality, socioeconomic factors are demonstrably one of the largest causes and there aren't links to genetics.

This is the argument that Damore was making, that there are less women in engineering and leadership positions not because of social constructs, but because of biological factors. The evidence he provided did not demonstrate ability differences. Sure, differences in preferences, yes, but those could be caused by the social constructs he was arguing against, and he didn't want to admit that.

Edit: Forgive me if I'm wrong, but aren't you also the HN user that tried to argue for taking away reproductive rights from poor people?

Re: Fired Google Engineer Loses Diversity Memo Challenge

#432

Post by rexpop »

fareesh wrote: post #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.…

Witch-hunts were authoritarian campaigns of gendercide. A gross, systematic slaughtering of thousands upon thousands of women. It's egregiously callous for you to misuse the term in this way.

Perhaps you men "snark-hunt".

Re: Fired Google Engineer Loses Diversity Memo Challenge

#433

Post by tdg »

ThomPete wrote: post #343
rayiner wrote: post #338

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s a core assumption that when it comes to employment, men and women are generally similar at a cognitive level and equally well suited to different white-collar professions. We adopted that presumption as a protective mechanism, when we came out of a long period of invoking pseudo-scientific ideas about differences between men and women to justify sexism.

Can you point to anywhere in his memo where he claims that men and women's cognitive level is different? Again I have read this quite a few times and I don't see it. So can you point me to exactly where he claims that?

Here (section "Why we are blind"): "[...] the Left tends to deny science concerning biological differences between people (e.g., IQ and sex differences)"

I don't know how else to read that other than "men are smarter". Is there any other reading?

Re: Fired Google Engineer Loses Diversity Memo Challenge

#434

Post by ThomPete »

tdg wrote: post #426
alexandercrohde wrote: post #405

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wait, what? Damore's memo doesn't mention intelligence or IQ at all [1], not even in the abstract or as distributions or as averages. -- Using the version of the memo cited on the wikipedia page https://web.archive.org/web/20170809220001/https://diversity...

It definitely mentions it. Here (section "Why we are blind"): "[...] the Left tends to deny science concerning biological differences between people (e.g., IQ and sex differences)" I don't know how else to read that other than "men are smarter". Is there any other reading?

Yes, of course, there are.

The correct reading is that there is biological difference both between the sexes and inside each of the sexes.

This is a reference to the identity politics you see especially in 2ndwave/3rd wave feminism which claims that almost everything is a social construct.

Re: Fired Google Engineer Loses Diversity Memo Challenge

#435

Post by dfasdfasdfasdf »

debt wrote: post #353
gowld wrote: post #214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The memo was written as part of a company training event. Damore attended a training and then wrote a response when asked for feedback. Very much doing his job.

I don’t see how circulating his feedback with coworkers about some training event was part of his job.

it was circulated by the people he sent it to. Jesus read a fucking book.

Re: Fired Google Engineer Loses Diversity Memo Challenge

#436

Post by tdg »

ThomPete wrote: post #434
tdg wrote: post #426

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It definitely mentions it. Here (section "Why we are blind"): "[...] the Left tends to deny science concerning biological differences between people (e.g., IQ and sex differences)" I don't know how else to read that other than "men are smarter". Is there any other reading?

Yes, of course, there are. The correct reading is that there is biological difference both between the sexes and inside each of the sexes. This is a reference to the identity politics you see especially in 2ndwave/3rd wave feminism which claims that almost everything is a social construct.

I don't get it.

He says there are IQ differences between people. Who are these "people" if not men and women? He either means men are smarter or he just randomly went on a tangent.

Let me ask you, when he says there are IQ differences between people, which groups of people do you think he means?

Re: Fired Google Engineer Loses Diversity Memo Challenge

#437

Post by stcredzero »

Consultant32452 wrote: post #401
dragonwriter wrote: post #394

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

I'm sorry, but some random nobody at Google having some wrong ideas about diversity policy does not deserve to be national front page news. James Damore is about as meek and mild as it gets. He's not some David Duke monster. None of us should have ever heard his name. This was a public assassination of a powerless nobody for cheap political points. That's the part that I have a problem with. I have no problem at all…

This was a public assassination of a powerless nobody for cheap political points. That's the part that I have a problem with.

This willingness to "un-person" someone for reasons of ideological fervor -- this is precisely why I, as a liberal, feel so alienated from so much of the far-left politics going around nowadays. I've personally been a target of such things. (I can't discuss it, but I can say that it was not gender based.)

It's such attitudes and the unreasonable fury behind them which most worries me.

Re: Fired Google Engineer Loses Diversity Memo Challenge

#438

Post by bduerst »

moduspol wrote: post #382
bduerst wrote: post #358

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except what you said about social constructs in your comment isn't argued in the memo, hence you're now projecting about "selective interpretation." Nobody is saying this isn't in context to hiring policies - that's your straw man. Damore was arguing that women were not in engineering and leadership positions because of preferences and biological abilities (in support of his memo's argument about hiring policies). Th…

> Nobody is saying this isn't in context to hiring policies - that's your straw man. You're evaluating the statement that way. That's not a straw man--it's removal of original context. > Damore was arguing that women were not in engineering and leadership positions because of preferences and biological abilities (in support of his memo's argument about hiring policies). Yet another example of the suspiciously common…

If you have to insert your own comments to read between the lines of Damore's memo, then that is the definition of selective interpretation.

Re: Fired Google Engineer Loses Diversity Memo Challenge

#439

Post by stcredzero »

dragonwriter wrote: post #408
Consultant32452 wrote: post #401

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm sorry, but some random nobody at Google having some wrong ideas about diversity policy does not deserve to be national front page news. James Damore is about as meek and mild as it gets. He's not some David Duke monster. None of us should have ever heard his name. This was a public assassination of a powerless nobody for cheap political points. That's the part that I have a problem with. I have no problem at all…

> I'm sorry, but some random nobody at Google having some wrong ideas about diversity policy does not deserve to be national front page news. Claims of anti-white-male discrimination in tech are man-bites-dog stories, and naturally get more attention for that reason, plus, Damore immediately sought out media with political biases to maximally promote that kind of story. It becoming national front page news and gettin…

No, it wasn't. It was public, but there was no assassination.

It sure looked like an intellectually dishonest, ideologically fervent character assassination to me.

Re: Fired Google Engineer Loses Diversity Memo Challenge

#440

Post by ThomPete »

tdg wrote: post #433
ThomPete wrote: post #343

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you point to anywhere in his memo where he claims that men and women's cognitive level is different? Again I have read this quite a few times and I don't see it. So can you point me to exactly where he claims that?

Here (section "Why we are blind"): "[...] the Left tends to deny science concerning biological differences between people (e.g., IQ and sex differences)" I don't know how else to read that other than "men are smarter". Is there any other reading?

Yes, of course, there is.

The correct reading is that there is biological difference both between the sexes and inside each of the sexes.

This is a reference to the identity politics you see especially in 2ndwave/3rd wave feminism which claims that almost everything is a social construct.

He isn't talking about who is better just that there are differences.

Post reply on HN