Fired Google Engineer Loses Diversity Memo Challenge • Hacker News Board

Re: Fired Google Engineer Loses Diversity Memo Challenge

#531

Post by threeseed » Sat, Feb 17, 2018, 4:44 AM UTC

simonebrunozzi wrote: post #287

eridius wrote: post #277

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

Nope. 100% disagree with you. Nobody should be fired for speaking out and/or starting a meaningful conversation. The opposite is censorship.

> Nobody should be fired for speaking out and/or starting a meaningful conversation.

Do you not live on the same planet as the rest of us ?

Because it is common, legal, socially popular and frankly the status quo for companies to fire you based on what you say during work time. After all companies are paying you during that time to represent them and their values.

Society actually expects people to be fired based on what they say during work.

Re: Fired Google Engineer Loses Diversity Memo Challenge

#532

Post by ThomPete » Sat, Feb 17, 2018, 4:44 AM UTC

mcguire wrote: post #515

ThomPete wrote: post #344

Reading the comments in this thread is disheartening. It mostly consists of either false claims of what Damore actually said or pre-conceived interpretations of his memo as being anti-diversity without a single, not a single reference to his memo.

My favorite part: " Men’s higher drive for status " We always ask why we don't see women in top leadership positions, but we never ask why we see so many men in these jobs. These positions often require long, stressful hours that may not be worth it if you want a balanced and fulfilling life. " Status is the primary metric that men are judged on4, pushing many men into these higher paying, less satisfying jobs for th…

No one is asking you to pity them. But if you want to compete with them head to head you better be prepared to do the same.

That's the point.

Re: Fired Google Engineer Loses Diversity Memo Challenge

#533

Post by shard972 » Sat, Feb 17, 2018, 4:47 AM UTC

ncallaway wrote: post #458

whataretensors wrote: post #345

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a despicable thing to destroy someone over an idea, despite the contents of that idea. I think tech workers are easy targets. For instance, we've all heard about the need for diversity in tech, but never hear about accredited investors being < 6 % female and < 1 % black.

> It's a despicable thing to destroy someone over an idea, despite the contents of that idea. Well, if I find out anyone holds nazi ideologies I'm happy to socially "destroy" them over those ideas. I agree that the government shouldn't punish them for those ideas, but I think individual citizens and entities have every right to disassociate and socially punish someone for those ideas. Now, I'm not saying that Damore'…

Lets make a distinction in socially destroy. If you found a nazi that worked for someone who knew he was a nazi and was fine with it, his wife was fine with it and all his friends were fine.

In this case how would you socially destroy them beyond pointing out to those around them what they have been hiding?

Re: Fired Google Engineer Loses Diversity Memo Challenge

#534

Post by thesmallestcat » Sat, Feb 17, 2018, 4:47 AM UTC

ThomPete wrote: post #502

hluska wrote: post #499

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yet, in your reply, you question the fellow's literacy?? That's not acceptable. We have taken the art of discourse and replaced it with barbs designed wholly to get likes, or whatever the hell Twitter calls them now. This does not help anyone.

Not sure what you think I should have replied. He claims I have a love for the alt-right and his attempt is to shame me. I wrote that message and then muted him.

You shouldn't have replied. You and the other guy are both out of your gourds, and you don't understand how crazy you look.

Re: Fired Google Engineer Loses Diversity Memo Challenge

#535

Post by z0r » Sat, Feb 17, 2018, 4:48 AM UTC

InclinedPlane wrote: post #472

ThomPete wrote: post #393

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Is this not you? https://twitter.com/Hello_World/status/956166173019836416 https://twitter.com/Hello_World/status/928650370104152065 https://twitter.com/Hello_World/status/867119704569237505 If someone is parroting a Peter Thiel quote in November of 2017 it's pretty obvious what agenda they are pushing. You, and Damore and so many others, are trying to dress up the regressive status quo as if it's something new, some…

I'm unimpressed with this kind of posting.

Re: Fired Google Engineer Loses Diversity Memo Challenge

#536

Post by stcredzero » Sat, Feb 17, 2018, 4:49 AM UTC

UncleMeat wrote: post #514

stcredzero wrote: post #400

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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. A…

But he wasn't asking questions. The document wasn't an invitation to explain where he was mistaken. By all accounts he was given feedback on his ideas before the final memo went out. In the very text he says that opposition to these ideas demonstrates bias and he therefore dismisses the very idea of being wrong. This wasn't some intellectual debate.

But he wasn't asking questions. The document wasn't an invitation to explain where he was mistaken.

It was precisely that.

By all accounts he was given feedback on his ideas before the final memo went out.

By his own account.

In the very text he says that opposition to these ideas demonstrates bias and he therefore dismisses the very idea of being wrong.

Quote, please.

This wasn't some intellectual debate.

No, the reaction to the memo turned out to be screeching and namecalling.

Here's a feminist interviewing James Damore: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5SFLoKa8FdA

Re: Fired Google Engineer Loses Diversity Memo Challenge

#537

Post by rayiner » Sat, Feb 17, 2018, 4:50 AM UTC

ThomPete wrote: post #366

skywhopper wrote: post #350

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here's a couple: Women on average show a higher interest in people and men in things We can make software engineering more people-oriented with pair programming and more collaboration. Unfortunately, there may be limits to how people- oriented certain roles at Google can be and we shouldn't deceive ourselves or students into thinking otherwise (some of our programs to get female students into coding might be doing th…

How does pointing out difference in interest and a pretty well-established fact that women on average are more cooperative by any metrics prove that he should have claimed that women do not belong on google? In fact, his point is that technology is not even for most men which he has made clear in other interviews.

The problem is the assumption that being cooperative is somehow a liability rather than a strength in a profession that's much more about cooperation than other engineering fields. (E.g. the trope that software is more complicated than an aircraft carrier because unlike in software, the toilet doesn't have modes of interaction with the steam launcher.)

Re: Fired Google Engineer Loses Diversity Memo Challenge

#538

Post by ThomPete » Sat, Feb 17, 2018, 4:50 AM UTC

UncleMeat wrote: post #524

dragonwriter wrote: post #450

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's just possible to read it as a poorly written attempt to say that the Left ignores science on biological IQ differences (perhaps, as is quite popular to point to on the Right, those associated with race) and also biological sex differences, rather than it being intended to refer to biological, sex-linked, IQ differences.

If we charitably assume that the entire thing is poorly written then it can mean anything we want! If you write something that people interpret as sexist due to your poor language and then spend no effort to correct that error.... that's still bad.

All it requires is that you read it in its full context. Read the memo. Then it's fairly obvious what he is talking about.

Re: Fired Google Engineer Loses Diversity Memo Challenge

#539

Post by UncleMeat » Sat, Feb 17, 2018, 4:50 AM UTC

reader5000 wrote: post #527

fzeroracer wrote: post #468

The problem with Damore's theory he posited (that the difference in traits and abilities between men and women is why you see a certain imbalance in tech) ignores the history of computer science, where in the early days of CS you had a large amount of women entering into software followed by a sharp dropoff in the 80s [1]. The 'biological differences' argument falls flat because it implies that somehow women changed…

>The 'biological differences' argument falls flat because it implies that somehow women changed on a biological level between 1984 and today. Alternatively, that the nature of software work changed.

In a way that aligns well with some nebulous personality difference between men and women? That's quite a claim.

It seems to me like the nature of the work hasn't even dramatically changed in the first place.

Re: Fired Google Engineer Loses Diversity Memo Challenge

#540

Post by tptacek » Sat, Feb 17, 2018, 4:50 AM UTC

stcredzero wrote: post #508

tptacek wrote: post #486

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Equality of outcomes" is a political catch phrase, and not one I introduced into the conversation.

Right. "The social compact" is your catch phrase, or at least it used to be.

I do believe in equality of opportunity, and do not believe we have it. You're familiar with what I think of tech management culture. Hiring, in particular, but none of the rest of it is any better. The idea that anyone would feel comfortable making assertions about things our field gets right offends me. As a profession, we're clowns.