James Damore and three others end Google suit • Hacker News Board

Re: James Damore and three others end Google suit

#561

Post by JSavageOne » Sat, May 09, 2020, 4:02 PM UTC

thosakwe wrote: post #464

ravenstine wrote: post #390

Damore was not offered a chance to receive forgiveness by either the company or the outrage mob, therefore I don't respect what people generally have to say about whether what he did was right or wrong. It's astounding that people are still debating this in this very HN thread. A society of any size that makes virtue claims while simultaneously adding an undue price to being wrong or insensitive deserves to be mocked…

1. I don't recall him ever "asking for forgiveness," or doing anything besides doubling down on his memo. 2. The "outrage mob" isn't real. You know who got James Damore fired? Himself. It's especially telling that you, and people who defend him, attribute zero fault whatsoever to the person who actually wrote the memo.

> You know who got James Damore fired? Himself

He didn't fire himself, Google fired him.

> It's especially telling that you, and people who defend him, attribute zero fault whatsoever to the person who actually

It's funny that you and the people who attack him always seem to completely ignore everything the parent comment you're replying to said, and write a comment that basically amounts to "but, you're wrong!"

Re: James Damore and three others end Google suit

#562

Post by UncleMeat » Sat, May 09, 2020, 4:02 PM UTC

ekianjo wrote: post #219

azinman2 wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But he did become an alt-right / Fox News / conservative machine darling.

You have to consider the possibility that they were the only people who he could actually talk to. Not that he wanted to be in such channels in the first place.

A while back I published some research that had implications about the us government’s treatment of digital privacy. A Russian media arm reached out to me for an interview.

I said no. Damore has the same choice.

Saying weird stuff about the kkk having cool uniforms was his own choice.

Re: James Damore and three others end Google suit

#563

Post by piflon » Sat, May 09, 2020, 4:03 PM UTC

wpietri wrote: post #527

ultrawox wrote: post #507

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google solicited the feedback. This is the problem: companies want it both ways. An open culture where people tell the truth about what they think (so that you don't get the brilliantly dysfunctional organizations that suck up huge amounts of money in lost efficiency) but none of the messy discomfort that comes from people actually disagreeing in an open society.

I've never worked at Google, so I can't say for sure. But from what I hear, there's plenty of disagreement. And Google may have generally asked for feedback. But I'm pretty sure they didn't say, "Hey, James, could you write a maximally divisive political opinion piece attacking a bunch of important internal efforts and implying that anybody who doesn't agree with you is just a villain in an Ayn Rand novel?"

They said "please share your opinion on this specific topic [the low proportion of women in engineering]." Regardless of how you color his response, they asked for exactly what he gave.

Re: James Damore and three others end Google suit

#564

Post by ravenstine » Sat, May 09, 2020, 4:04 PM UTC

wpietri wrote: post #540

ravenstine wrote: post #526

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Calling it an outrage "mob" is dishonest > Again, it's especially telling that you and the people who defend attribute zero fault to the person who actually wrote the memo. I've been honest and I replied in good faith, and yet you just sidestep and lump me in with some made up group of people whom you say attribute "zero fault" to Damore. You didn't listen to me at all. You didn't even ask me what faults I would at…

If you're replying in good faith, you should either defend your "outrage mob" accusation or apologize for it.

So they can just dismiss things I say and pretend they can read my mind, but I am supposed to either defend or apologize for it because someone says so?

EDIT: I mistakenly thought your comment was from the person I was having the conversation with.

Re: James Damore and three others end Google suit

#565

Post by piflon » Sat, May 09, 2020, 4:05 PM UTC

mokus wrote: post #534

ultrawox wrote: post #491

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the modern conservative movement largely is explained by "a group of people that oppose liberalism." That's why you have such a weird coalition of religious groups, older intellectual conservatives, young Republicans, business people, trolls. They really don't have a ton in common, but frankly I get it. I live in the Midwest and while I consider myself an independent, most of my views are moderate or left-win…

This is speculation but it seems like we should inevitably see political factions in the US being defined in this way (and it happens in the Democratic Party too, maybe not in as obvious or extreme a way) as a result of the well-known two-party endgame of our voting system. If your faction isn’t one of the two, your choices are to join one or be irrelevant. So you jump on the bandwagon with whoever you hate least, an…

It may also be specific to conservative movements, given that by definition they oppose some change in society and so would naturally be diverse in their reason for opposing it (possibly more so than the supporters would be diverse in their reasons for supporting it).

Re: James Damore and three others end Google suit

#566

Post by UncleMeat » Sat, May 09, 2020, 4:05 PM UTC

zozbot234 wrote: post #236

somewhereoutth wrote: post #226

I am shocked that there is even a discussion to be had on this. In architecture (a somewhat older profession, but also concerning things constructed by people), women previously did have a hard time, and often had to practice under their husbands/partners name. Mercifully this ended some while ago, and now architecture schools and onwards are more evenly gender balanced. Nobody suggests that women are somehow natural…

Not just architecture, also medicine and law. The whole question is what's different about math, CS, engineering and the physical sciences that makes it so much harder to reach gender balance there? If you look at the commonalities that these fields share, the "things, not people" aspect is the most prominent by far.

Microbiology is “things, not people” and is far more balanced.

Re: James Damore and three others end Google suit

#567

Post by JSavageOne » Sat, May 09, 2020, 4:06 PM UTC

glenda wrote: post #427

ravenstine wrote: post #390

Damore was not offered a chance to receive forgiveness by either the company or the outrage mob, therefore I don't respect what people generally have to say about whether what he did was right or wrong. It's astounding that people are still debating this in this very HN thread. A society of any size that makes virtue claims while simultaneously adding an undue price to being wrong or insensitive deserves to be mocked…

I agree with you in theory, but it’s a bit different. If he is making the workplace less comfortable for particular groups of people then I certainly would have no issue firing him. You are free to hold any belief you want, but once you’re in my ear with some misinformed ideas that are potentially hurtful to a large group I am free to tell you to be quiet or leave. Of course, it’s your right not to listen to me... bu…

If your company had a sizable portion of racists, and an employee said something anti-racist that made the racists feel uncomfortable, would you feel compelled to fire the anti-racist?

I'm a big believer in the principle of freedom of speech. It's sad that employees don't have freedom of speech in the workplace.

Re: James Damore and three others end Google suit

#568

Post by lawnchair_larry » Sat, May 09, 2020, 4:06 PM UTC

ergothus wrote: post #56

daenz wrote: post #16

I 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.

You can’t do that. You have to judge based on what was written, not what you’ve convinced yourself was an ulterior motive and dismissing his actual words as a facade. This behavior is so perplexing.

It is not what he was saying. Why do so many people absolutely insist on misinterpreting it to the point of willful distortion?

Re: James Damore and three others end Google suit

#569

Post by recursive » Sat, May 09, 2020, 4:06 PM UTC

balls187 wrote: post #538

aguyfromnb wrote: post #530

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The "outrage mob" isn't real. You have got to be kidding me. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Online_shaming

You mean consequences for your behavior?

You mean like how domestic violence is just consequences for the victim's behavior?

Re: James Damore and three others end Google suit

#570

Post by wpietri » Sat, May 09, 2020, 4:09 PM UTC

ravenstine wrote: post #557

wpietri wrote: post #442

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Receive forgiveness? Pardon me, but where exactly did Damore ask for forgiveness? People very rarely accept apologies from people who don't offer them.

You don't need to ask forgiveness in order to receive it. Google could have done the following: - Recognize that any damage caused by the memo had been done. The toothpaste was out of the tube. - See that Damore's memo wasn't written with malice or intention to make people feel uncomfortable. - Allow Damore to keep his position so long as he does not participate in such political discussion at the company again. This…

Could you please show me where Damore says he made a mistake and apologized for it?

I don't think this was minor, and I don't see any indication it was a mistake. One doesn't accidentally write an 8-page memo, especially an explicitly political one.

But even assuming it were a minor mistake, then it was absolutely on Damore to own that. I'd never fire somebody for a mistake. But for doing something harmful and then refusing to admit error, let alone make amends? I don't see an option other than firing, because there's no reason to think the person won't keep right on making "mistakes" that are similar or worse.