Fired Google Engineer Loses Diversity Memo Challenge • Hacker News Board

Re: Fired Google Engineer Loses Diversity Memo Challenge

#791

Post by tptacek » Sat, Feb 17, 2018, 11:22 PM UTC

stcredzero wrote: post #787

tptacek wrote: post #751

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's open season on everyone in virtually every American workplace. Why won't you acknowledge this? You're a reasonable guy. We've had dinner together! What's happening here isn't a shift. What you're demanding is a new special protection for "people who can defend their position scientifically".

It's open season on everyone in virtually every American workplace. Why won't you acknowledge this? Oh, but I do acknowledge this. I would like to call attention to it. I thank you for your support. What's happening here isn't a shift. In the old days, one could cite such studies. The reactions and the consequences are indeed a shift in society. An outrageously authoritarian shift. What you're demanding is a new spec…

You understand that, in much of the country, you can be fired simply for being a Democrat or a Republican, right?

The law recognizes the rights of the owners and managers of companies to organize them out of like-minded people.

If that's problematic for you, you should lobby for employment laws to change. It's arguably not the NLRB's place to come up with new protections; they're an agency largely unaccountable to the voters.

Re: Fired Google Engineer Loses Diversity Memo Challenge

#792

Post by stcredzero » Sat, Feb 17, 2018, 11:26 PM UTC

hluska wrote: post #496

stcredzero wrote: post #483

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do they make distinctions between the 4 major sub-groups? Molyneux is, as far as I know, a kooky Libertarian. Mainstream media is getting pretty skewed and desperate for eyeballs. If you're not shocked and dismayed, you're not looking very hard. Basically, in these death-throe days of old media news, you have to do your own fact checking. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c0ykkHNRAro

I have no idea and honestly, at this point, I don't really care. For some reason, politics has become a game of zingers and one liners. Actual respectful discourse has gone out of style. Hell, I hopped over to Twitter to defend ThomPete against a very tasteless tweet. I dreamed that maybe, just maybe I could be involved in a conversation that revolved around mutual respect and well worded arguments. Instead, there wa…

I have no idea and honestly, at this point, I don't really care. For some reason, politics has become a game of zingers and one liners. Actual respectful discourse has gone out of style.

It's precisely this sort of apathy which far-left ideologues are using. Given that you are an advocate of good old fashioned rational dialogue, it might not be too long before they come after you next and try to lump you into the "Alt-Right." They're already doing that to people who are basically just Republicans, like Ben Shapiro.

Re: Fired Google Engineer Loses Diversity Memo Challenge

#793

Post by stcredzero » Sat, Feb 17, 2018, 11:31 PM UTC

ThomPete wrote: post #545

thesmallestcat wrote: post #534

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I look crazy for saying he didn't learn to read when he claimed I love the alt-right based on that post I wrote? Maybe I shouldn't have replied but he was basically trying to start a mob against me. Not that I care but just wanted for the record that his claim was wrong and didn't want to engage in any civil manor when not spoken to that way either.

Maybe I shouldn't have replied but he was basically trying to start a mob against me.

This is precisely how they operate. They are trying to use a tactic of persuasion by repetition simultaneously with a tactic of tarring by association. Far left ideologues are currently engaging in this behavior towards DC Comics artist Ethan Van Sciver, claiming he's an actual Nazi based on his drawing the Green Lantern villain Sinestro with a Hitler mustache and titling it "My Struggle" -- ten years ago. It is conscious and deliberate. And it has been going on that way since 2012 or so.

Re: Fired Google Engineer Loses Diversity Memo Challenge

#794

Post by stcredzero » Sat, Feb 17, 2018, 11:37 PM UTC

tptacek wrote: post #566

stcredzero wrote: post #262

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So, what if you were an employer who was receptive to the "scientific" arguments for completely equivalent aptitude between males and females, and you had employees that shared that view, and your employees organized to promote that view organically. Then someone dissented from that view and a large number of those employees demanded the head of the dissenter? In that case, the NLRB has your back! But in general it s…

I assume you write this knowing (a) that I do not at all agree with your conclusions about "science" and (b) do not really care, because science is not the issue here. Google has an anti-harassment policy. Damore violated it. The NLRB defers to employers in the enforcement of anti-harassment policies. Damore cannot use the NLRA to "overturn" Google's anti-harassment policies. This part of Damore's game is over.

(b) do not really care, because science is not the issue here.

The issue is witch-hunts. You may well come to care if and when they decide to come for you. Given my conclusions that you are a rational person who values truth, that may well happen to you. Then again, most people are just fine with coercion and injustice, so long as it's happening to people who "deserve it," in the style of comic book stories. It may never happen to you, and you may well be fine with them. That is also quite normal.

Re: Fired Google Engineer Loses Diversity Memo Challenge

#795

Post by stcredzero » Sat, Feb 17, 2018, 11:48 PM UTC

tptacek wrote: post #746

pokemongoaway wrote: post #744

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find it bizarre that you basically concede the ground that it is similar to a thought crime and feel no need to defend your stance that his memo should be classified as "anti-diversity." Or is saying "you can call it a thought crime if you want" authorizing his use of this language, from a position of moral authority?

This amorphous right commenters on this thread seem to think Damore had not to be fired, he didn't have. That's what employment at will means. You don't even know whether I think his termination was reasonable. All you know is that I believe --- and so does the NLRB in this instance --- he did not enjoy special protections against unreasonable termination. What I find especially funny about this is that Damore is a c…

But employment at will isn't just a conservative value --- it's a signpost conservative value, one of the basic principles on which we organize our market economy.

What went on with James Damore has nothing to do with the "good workings" of the employment marketplace. Rather, it's the abuse of at-will employment by groups to push political agendas through coercion.

Damore is in this instance a conservative the same way the nihilists in The Big Lebowski were nihilistic.

Before the precipitating events, James Damore counted himself a "Classical Liberal." From what I can tell, he may have leaned Libertarian. Honestly, if you were in his shoes, would you think you were treated fairly? I think your answer would be that you wouldn't have been in his shoes. You would have advised James Damore to keep his head down and his mouth shut. The necessity of such a stance is a sign that there's some form of at least mild oppression.

Given a chance, would you stick to your nihilist guns and turn down a billion dollars?

Re: Fired Google Engineer Loses Diversity Memo Challenge

#796

Post by verylittlemeat » Sat, Feb 17, 2018, 11:50 PM UTC

DoreenMichele wrote: post #752

verylittlemeat wrote: post #709

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The "constructive purpose" of the discussion for a man is to practice talking about difficult subjects. The real world implication of discussing it is suggesting that the potential of women in tech is up for debate. Just talking about some things is enough to imply unintended conclusions. That's how it works in the real world no matter how hard you want to play Mr. Logic. To believe otherwise is extremely naive and p…

I was married for a lot of years. My marriage was a case of opposites attract. We argued incessantly about everything but personal belief. It took us a lot of years to get to the point where we could go furniture shopping and communicate constructively in order to agree on a purchase instead of fighting about who would win this one. We often were focused on entirely different attributes in our decision making process…

That's your spouse, come on. We're talking about coworkers, people who casually end up in meetings together and talk shit or play politics with zero regard for scorching the earth to get ahead. You have massive incentive not to casually degrade the existence of your spouse. Your example isn't even a different ballpark it's a different game.

In my experience most arguments of political nature have nothing to do with finding the right answer. These arguments are social posturing. It's not about me being right it's about you not being right. Some of the worst argumentative know-it-alls I ever met were only that way almost as a form of preemptive strike. They were terrified that someone might socially dominate them so they had to dominate the other person first.

For that reason I'm deeply skeptical that Damore was trying to have a conversation in good faith. It seems much more likely to me that he saw a social justice culture that claimed to have a monopoly on what is right and that really got on his nerves. I bet Damore would have been an outspoken social justice advocate if his workshop came to him and asked "hey, do you think these gender initiatives are good?" Instead I bet he got something more along the lines of "this is why you think wrong."

Re: Fired Google Engineer Loses Diversity Memo Challenge

#797

Post by stcredzero » Sat, Feb 17, 2018, 11:51 PM UTC

dragonwriter wrote: post #467

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…

> 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, face-value reading of the memo and impute motivations to him. Motivation isn't what defines harassment; effect on others is what is relevant to harassment; not only is imputing a motive not necessary to finding harassment in the act of presenting the memo as he…

Motivation isn't what defines harassment; effect on others is what is relevant to harassment

So this is why hysterical ideologues have latched onto "harassment." It basically short-circuits due process and the necessity of proof. It also scores huge emotional points. It's the perfect vehicle for moral panics and witch-hunts and mob behaviors. Is it any wonder, then, that it is now exploited for political gain?

Re: Fired Google Engineer Loses Diversity Memo Challenge

#798

Post by stcredzero » Sat, Feb 17, 2018, 11:55 PM UTC

ncallaway wrote: post #764

stcredzero wrote: post #755

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fact that so many of Google's employees could demonstrate the degree of ideological hysteria which they demonstrated greatly concerns me, and has a direct bearing on the 1A context.

It does not, because there's no 1A issue as the first amendment does not grant you any protections from your employer. Now, as I said before, if you want to have a discussion about whether Twitter and Google and other modern media companies should have some 1A responsibilities in their role as gatekeepers to online speech, that's a discussion that's entirely separate† from Twitter and Google's responsibilities to the…

It does not, because there's no 1A issue as the first amendment does not grant you any protections from your employer.

I was clearly referring to the greater issue with regards to Google's general power in our culture and what the attitude within Google which was revealed in this event might mean. Not only did you state that you did not want to have that discussion, but then you just tried to shove words in my mouth as if I were trying to have your different discussion and advocating an unsupportable point.

Privates entities aren't required to provide you a soapbox.

Private entities shouldn't be allowed to knock down everyone else's soapbox, which is precisely what Google's market power allows them to more or less do.

Re: Fired Google Engineer Loses Diversity Memo Challenge

#799

Post by stcredzero » Sat, Feb 17, 2018, 11:59 PM UTC

YeGoblynQueenne wrote: post #696

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 will fall in line, and you don't even dare sound like you're secretly against us. How is that not "thought-crime?" Well, to begin with because nobody said it's a crime, rather a valid reason for his employment to fire him. Second, "thought-crime" refers to the rules of a society with a certain type of government (an imaginary one, in Orwell's book). Google is not a society, it's a private company and you can't…

Second, "thought-crime" refers to the rules of a society with a certain type of government (an imaginary one, in Orwell's book)

You know full well that it has come to mean a certain form of deliberately suppressing dissent through coercive means.

Google is not a society, it's a private company and you can't really think of its internal rules as defining crime, or being laws etc.

But our society is a society. Apparently, Google is full of ideologues who I wouldn't expect to have any qualms about unnerving forms of social engineering society, to make it fit their particular political agenda.

Re: Fired Google Engineer Loses Diversity Memo Challenge

#800

Post by DoreenMichele » Sat, Feb 17, 2018, 11:59 PM UTC

verylittlemeat wrote: post #796

DoreenMichele wrote: post #752

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was married for a lot of years. My marriage was a case of opposites attract. We argued incessantly about everything but personal belief. It took us a lot of years to get to the point where we could go furniture shopping and communicate constructively in order to agree on a purchase instead of fighting about who would win this one. We often were focused on entirely different attributes in our decision making process…

That's your spouse, come on. We're talking about coworkers, people who casually end up in meetings together and talk shit or play politics with zero regard for scorching the earth to get ahead. You have massive incentive not to casually degrade the existence of your spouse. Your example isn't even a different ballpark it's a different game. In my experience most arguments of political nature have nothing to do with f…

You and I are not even discussing the same thing. I am talking about discussions about Damore on the internet generally and on HN in specific. Discussion on HN can develop over hours, days, weeks, months even years. Some people here have known each other for years. In most cases, they can just walk away if things get too harried, regroup, rethink, conclude "that phrasing went super bad" and try something else.