It was a joint request to dismiss with no further comment, ie, almost certainly a settlement & a nondisclosure agreement.
I'd be curious what the agreement is if only because it didn't seem like he had much in the way of a strong with case.
James Damore and three others end Google suit
81–90 of 1001 posts
Re: James Damore and three others end Google suit
#82I remember at a previous job, a female engineer talking to other engineers when the Damore story broke. She said "I can't believe he said that women can't be good engineers" and indicated he deserved to be fired. As someone who actually read what he wrote, I just had to bite my tongue. That's not what he said at all , but even making the distinction makes you one of "them" and politicizes the workplace. It's just dis…
> As someone who actually read what he wrote, I just had to bite my tongue. That's not what he said at all, As someone that also read it, those arent the words he used, but that is very much what he was saying. A facade of misrepresented psuedoscience doesnt change the intent, motivation, or reality.
> Discriminating just to increase the representation of women in tech is as misguided and biased as mandating increases for women’s representation in the homeless, work-related and violent deaths, prisons, and school dropouts
Re: James Damore and three others end Google suit
#83I remember at a previous job, a female engineer talking to other engineers when the Damore story broke. She said "I can't believe he said that women can't be good engineers" and indicated he deserved to be fired. As someone who actually read what he wrote, I just had to bite my tongue. That's not what he said at all , but even making the distinction makes you one of "them" and politicizes the workplace. It's just dis…
> As someone who actually read what he wrote, I just had to bite my tongue. That's not what he said at all, As someone that also read it, those arent the words he used, but that is very much what he was saying. A facade of misrepresented psuedoscience doesnt change the intent, motivation, or reality.
Lack of interest in a subject does not mean a lack of capability.
Re: James Damore and three others end Google suit
#84Earlier quoted context omitted.
You didn't have to bite your tongue - you could've told her she's wrong.
If he wanted to risk being treated as a radioactive dumpster all the rest of his time working at that company - sure, he could. Maybe it wouldn't happen - maybe she would turn out a wonderful individual who would thank him for correcting her and educating her about the truth. Or maybe not. Given the risks of "maybe not" - the smart money is on "bite your tongue".
I'm not sure how "making broad generalizations about your coworkers based on their gender" differs from all the other stuff most people have to keep quiet about as they go about their work.
Re: James Damore and three others end Google suit
#85Earlier quoted context omitted.
> As someone who actually read what he wrote, I just had to bite my tongue. That's not what he said at all, As someone that also read it, those arent the words he used, but that is very much what he was saying. A facade of misrepresented psuedoscience doesnt change the intent, motivation, or reality.
That's not what he said. He said on average women do not prefer the field, and optimizing to change that observable fact is a fool's errand. I don't have an opinion on whether he's right or wrong but I don't think he shouldn't be able to make that argument...
Re: James Damore and three others end Google suit
#86Re: James Damore and three others end Google suit
#87I remember at a previous job, a female engineer talking to other engineers when the Damore story broke. She said "I can't believe he said that women can't be good engineers" and indicated he deserved to be fired. As someone who actually read what he wrote, I just had to bite my tongue. That's not what he said at all , but even making the distinction makes you one of "them" and politicizes the workplace. It's just dis…
She's not wrong. He shared a manifesto about gender differences in the workplace. In it, he calls women neurotic. Whether people's read on the manifesto is reductive of his overall argument isn't the point. He showed a serious lack of judgement writing and posting that in his workplace. He should not have played the part of expert gender/psychology expert. A researcher he cites specifically disagrees with his takeawa…
Saying that men and women tend to have different preferences doesn't make a statement about their capabilities, nor is it really that controversial. The pursuit of a 50/50 ratio is counter-productive to free and open choice. Encouragement and opportunity should be the goal, not a forced ratio outcome.
Re: James Damore and three others end Google suit
#88I remember at a previous job, a female engineer talking to other engineers when the Damore story broke. She said "I can't believe he said that women can't be good engineers" and indicated he deserved to be fired. As someone who actually read what he wrote, I just had to bite my tongue. That's not what he said at all , but even making the distinction makes you one of "them" and politicizes the workplace. It's just dis…
Very few can handle the truth when they feel something different inside. You don't win over people with facts, fact support internal believes or they get ignored, blocked or morphed.
Re: James Damore and three others end Google suit
#89Re: James Damore and three others end Google suit
#90I remember at a previous job, a female engineer talking to other engineers when the Damore story broke. She said "I can't believe he said that women can't be good engineers" and indicated he deserved to be fired. As someone who actually read what he wrote, I just had to bite my tongue. That's not what he said at all , but even making the distinction makes you one of "them" and politicizes the workplace. It's just dis…
So... this is typical of the way this argument goes. Many HN readers are essentially "fellow travellers" with Damore. And you agree with him, and with that whitepaper thing he wrote. But here's the thing: every time this comes up, this is framed, as you do, as a failure of "everyone else" (meaning left-leaning general folks, often women themselves) failing to understand the truth of what he wrote. But what you don't…
It's strange for that to be so controversial. Not having an interest in a field does not mean you're not capable. Perhaps that's the nuance that's missing.