Google removes its head of diversity after 2007 blog post surfaces • Hacker News Board

Re: Google removes its head of diversity after 2007 blog post surfaces

#781

Post by ipaddr » Thu, Jun 03, 2021, 6:36 PM UTC

andrei_says_ wrote: post #547

lgleason wrote: post #247

Live by the sword, die by the sword. That said, firing him, like they did with Damore would have been more consistent. Because everyone is under arbitration agreements that always benefit the company, vs the courts where you might have a shot at justice, they have no incentive to do that. As repugnant as his past anti-semitic rant was, people change and sometimes say and do stupid things. In a sane world this guy wou…

“If you give me six lines written by the hand of the most honest of men, I will find something in them which will hang him.” And hey, great news, now we have every line written by every man, woman and child automatically captured and archived forever in an easy to search dossier. Someone who wrote a racist or anti-Semitic comment in 2007 could have evolved to deeper understanding and to a more compassionate worldview…

The wise enough to not use their real name will survive. The culling of the real name begins. This is the literal killing of the 'you have nothing to hide' meme that goes to show you have something to hide.

Re: Google removes its head of diversity after 2007 blog post surfaces

#782

Post by allturtles » Thu, Jun 03, 2021, 6:36 PM UTC

throwaway09223 wrote: post #440

michaelscott wrote: post #369

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In terms of getting people fired/removed/cancelled for remarks, yes absolutely. That may be a function of social media and the scale of communication in modern times, but either way the sensitivity of the vocal minority has definitely changed even in my relatively short life.

You say yes, but can you explain how it is different? As far as I can tell it's the same as it was a century ago. The only change is the subject matter. Do you think you'd keep your job after saying something anti-Christian in the 1950s? Look at what happened to Sinead O'Connor in the early 90s after she spoke out against child abuse in the Catholic church. Maybe the biggest difference is that now we write when we co…

> Look at what happened to Sinead O'Connor in the early 90s after she spoke out against child abuse in the Catholic church.

I don't think this is an apt comparison at all.

1. Sinead O'Connor is a celebrity, celebrities have always had more scrutiny. It doesn't seem comparable to the random employees getting fired / random HS students losing their college offers that are happening today.

2. She did not just speak out against child abuse, she held up a photo of the pope on national TV while singing "evil", and then tore it up. This was obviously an act intended to be very public and very controversial.

3. What actually happened to her other than some angry editorials? Were her performances canceled by venues?

Re: Google removes its head of diversity after 2007 blog post surfaces

#783

Post by nojokes » Thu, Jun 03, 2021, 6:37 PM UTC

nojokes wrote: post #431

How are his comments antisemitic?

Some other comments point out that his posts contain general racist sentiment so perhaps also these comments should be viewed in this context.

Re: Google removes its head of diversity after 2007 blog post surfaces

#784

Post by sirjee » Thu, Jun 03, 2021, 6:37 PM UTC

grumple wrote: post #679

sirjee wrote: post #660

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pretty sure he was not chief diversity officer 14 years ago but I agree it should have been "If I were an israeli...".

Even then... do we accuse every American of bloodlust for our nation's warmongering? Or every Chinese person for their governments treatment of the Uighur/Tibet/etc? Governments != people of a nation people often / usually don't approve of governmental actions.

No we should not accuse but as the citizen of such a regime I should feel responsible of its actions, I should condemn it and may be expect accusations of supporting such a regime.

Re: Google removes its head of diversity after 2007 blog post surfaces

#785

Post by mcguire » Thu, Jun 03, 2021, 6:37 PM UTC

michaelscott wrote: post #369

GrinningFool wrote: post #295

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> but today it is all about getting scalps, You say "today" as if it's ever been any different. Has it?

In terms of getting people fired/removed/cancelled for remarks, yes absolutely. That may be a function of social media and the scale of communication in modern times, but either way the sensitivity of the vocal minority has definitely changed even in my relatively short life.

"...the sensitivity of the vocal minority has definitely changed even in my relatively short life."

I realize that you didn't mean this statement the way I am reading it, but I'm having a hard time not reading this as a reference to the time when the minority was less vocal and knew its place.

Re: Google removes its head of diversity after 2007 blog post surfaces

#786

Post by ipaddr » Thu, Jun 03, 2021, 6:38 PM UTC

bryanrasmussen wrote: post #762

zimpenfish wrote: post #755

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> there are people who get the benefit of a doubt for murder after 14 years They tend not to get put in charge of anti-murder departments, though, like this person being made Head Of Diversity.

well probably they tend not to get that because once you've done time in the U.S you're screwed whether it was for stealing a candy bar, dealing drugs, or murder. On the other hand the exception to that rule would be - I've known guys who were drug addicts, caught, go through rehabs, and become counselors and psychologists in the judicial system. Which is pretty close to the scenario under discussion. on edit - ok on…

But never police or doctors who can prescribe drugs.

Re: Google removes its head of diversity after 2007 blog post surfaces

#787

Post by dougmwne » Thu, Jun 03, 2021, 6:38 PM UTC

kache_ wrote: post #716

dougmwne wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thank you. Everyone on this thread should read the original words instead of the pull quotes. I am a staunch progressive and am afraid to make my own comment on his words. We are living through a strange political moment.

My whole twitter account is 100% only recruiter bait. I cycle my reddit nicks every 2 months or so. I've cleaned out everything that I've posted as a teenager (even though I am a sensible person) Not taking any chances. Saw the writing on the wall with Damore. I should probably axe this nick but I've grown fond of its upvotes. So whatever :P Always assume you've been dox'd.

Once we get reliable deep learning recognition of writing styles we are well and truly fucked.

Re: Google removes its head of diversity after 2007 blog post surfaces

#788

Post by [deleted] » Thu, Jun 03, 2021, 6:39 PM UTC

mooseburger wrote: post #168

xvolter wrote: post #51

For anyone who is interested, the actual blog post on his website was deleted. It's available on the Way Back Machine: https://web.archive.org/web/20210601160519/https://www.kamau...

Interesting. I wasn't sure about blacks' position relative to jews on the oppression stack. I guess jews are actually above them (i.e. blacks cannot criticize jews the way they can whites)? Was this always the case? As I recall, Louis Farrakhan gets away with worse.

[deleted]

Re: Google removes its head of diversity after 2007 blog post surfaces

#789

Post by [deleted] » Thu, Jun 03, 2021, 6:39 PM UTC

chewmieser wrote: post #315

frockington1 wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And that is why I stopped calling myself a progressive years ago. In my youth I thought progressive meant trying to continually better yourself and your community. Now the focus seems to be on cancelling any viewpoint that conflicts with yours. The new trend of digging further and further back in the past makes it even more counter to my previous beliefs of the word

I just don't understand this viewpoint as it completely ignores the history of humanity. "Cancel culture" has been used for many centuries to silence dissenters. Take a look at Galieleo as an example. He was excommunicated or "canceled" by religious organizations that held the primary means of power. He was even forced to recant his positions by these groups. How is this any different than today?

[deleted]

Re: Google removes its head of diversity after 2007 blog post surfaces

#790

Post by yownie » Thu, Jun 03, 2021, 6:40 PM UTC

sirjee wrote: post #660

chadash wrote: post #633

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The quote was: "If I were a Jew I would be concerned about my insatiable appetite for war and killing in defense of myself" Yes, the sentiment is (possibly) anti-israel, not anti-semetic, but the wording itself implies that Jews have insatiable appetites for war. I'm not saying it wasn't an honest mistake, but someone who is chief diversity officer at a major corporation should certainly be attuned to the difference…

Pretty sure he was not chief diversity officer 14 years ago but I agree it should have been "If I were an israeli...".

Which begs the question, how does one go from that blog post to a diversity officer at one of the most famous Corporations in the world?