Google reports soaring attrition among Black women • Hacker News Board

Re: Google reports soaring attrition among Black women

#331

Post by kbelder » Fri, Jul 02, 2021, 5:41 PM UTC

bko wrote: post #15

cyberlurker wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I want to know also. My guess is Black or Latino of every gender/sexuality.

I don't think so because in their 2019 diversity report they have breakdowns of Asian+, Black+, Latinx+, Native American+ and White+ in an "Intersectional workforce" chart. I think that has to do with gender and sexuality, so those shouldn't be + Their hires and workforce representation are ~40% Asian+ but I don't think that qualifies as diversity. https://kstatic.googleusercontent.com/files/93d9a4094693cb78...

It also has the effect of pushing as many people into the +buckets as possible, making it so all marginal cases are included.

This could be a modern incarnation of the 'one drop' rule, thinking that if you're part minority, that is still the most important part of your makeup. Or, more likely, it's to inflate numbers as much as possible for PR.

Re: Google reports soaring attrition among Black women

#332

Post by dragonwriter » Fri, Jul 02, 2021, 5:42 PM UTC

ttt0 wrote: post #324

Traster wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I see this criticism of CRT/wokeism etc very often and I really want to address a point about people talking past each other. Proponents of CRT don't say they want to divide people based on group characteristics, they say people are divided based on group characteristics and they recognise that whilst individualists deny what is evidently true. Essentially it's the position that people are negatively impacted due to…

I'm not a fan of CRT, but you're 100% right. The issue with CRT is that every other theory and research of this subject (eg. IQ differences) has been shut down or obscured due to allegations of racism or fear of how society would react to such knowledge. And that poses a problem. You can't even propose any alternative theory in the current climate. Second, the same criticism applies to CRT. There is a double standard…

> The issue with CRT is that every other theory and research of this subject (eg. IQ differences) has been shut down or obscured due to allegations of racism or fear of how the society would react to such knowledge

No, it hasn't.

Not even your specific example (racial IQ dofferences), on which there continues to be new work published (both on the differences and on influences, both genetic and environmental.)

So if “the issue” with CRT is just this thing that is neither true nor about CRT, then that’s pretty much the same as there being, in fact, no issue with CRT.

Re: Google reports soaring attrition among Black women

#333

Post by MyHypatia » Fri, Jul 02, 2021, 5:43 PM UTC

marcinzm wrote: post #112

danielrpa wrote: post #55

I happen to be very familiar with Google's diversity efforts and have many Black and Latinx friends and acquaintances in the company. Google is one of the most racially inclusive tech companies in the world. It really tries hard to fix historical disparities between races in ways that you don't see in most companies, ranging from very active promotion of minorities to programs dedicated to hiring them. The interview…

I'm curious how the interview process at Google compares to other tech companies. I don't mean the text written afterwards but the actual interview process. My female friend interviewed at a number of large tech companies, not Google due to it's COVID hiring slowdown, and generally there was at least one interviewer that made comments I never, as a white man, have heard from an interviewer. Not outright sexist but th…

This has been my experience as well. There are usually 6-8 men on the panel interviewing me. Most of the interviewers are completely normal and fair, but in almost every interview there are 1-2 men who seem to be trying to figure out what fraud I am pulling.

Re: Google reports soaring attrition among Black women

#334

Post by ttt0 » Fri, Jul 02, 2021, 5:50 PM UTC

dragonwriter wrote: post #332

ttt0 wrote: post #324

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not a fan of CRT, but you're 100% right. The issue with CRT is that every other theory and research of this subject (eg. IQ differences) has been shut down or obscured due to allegations of racism or fear of how society would react to such knowledge. And that poses a problem. You can't even propose any alternative theory in the current climate. Second, the same criticism applies to CRT. There is a double standard…

> The issue with CRT is that every other theory and research of this subject (eg. IQ differences) has been shut down or obscured due to allegations of racism or fear of how the society would react to such knowledge No, it hasn't. Not even your specific example (racial IQ dofferences), on which there continues to be new work published (both on the differences and on influences, both genetic and environmental.) So if “…

The issue with CRT is that it's anti-white. If we would hold it up to the same standard as something like for example the Culture of Critique.

Re: Google reports soaring attrition among Black women

#335

Post by dragonwriter » Fri, Jul 02, 2021, 5:52 PM UTC

ttt0 wrote: post #334

dragonwriter wrote: post #332

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The issue with CRT is that every other theory and research of this subject (eg. IQ differences) has been shut down or obscured due to allegations of racism or fear of how the society would react to such knowledge No, it hasn't. Not even your specific example (racial IQ dofferences), on which there continues to be new work published (both on the differences and on influences, both genetic and environmental.) So if “…

The issue with CRT is that it's anti-white. If we would hold it up to the same standard as something like for example the Culture of Critique.

> The issue with CRT is that it's anti-white.

That's not the issue previously claimed but, like it, also false. CRT is not anti-White.

Re: Google reports soaring attrition among Black women

#336

Post by slumdev » Fri, Jul 02, 2021, 5:59 PM UTC

sterlind wrote: post #226

enumjorge wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I’m guessing it’s one of the most welcoming and meritocratic industries! And I’m guessing you’re not one of the affected minorities. Otherwise you might see that “the system works for this subset of people so it must be working for everyone” is a flawed and untrue argument, at least in tech. People pushing for more equal treatment of certain minorities didn’t happen out of the blue. There’s a long history of certai…

a good example of this is the disabled. any of those same brilliant tech workers could acquire a disability at any time - they come from the same group of people , but we seem quite under-represented. and the developer tools themselves tend not to be accessible (I can find literally nothing online, or even internally, about using Visual Studio with Dragon NaturallySpeaking.) it's curious, right?

People who are deaf, legally (but not totally) blind, on dialysis, or with a slew of other disabilities are not visually distinguishable from people who do not have a disability.

People with disabilities are the most neglected of any demographic because they are not easily exploited for political gain.

Re: Google reports soaring attrition among Black women

#337

Post by ttt0 » Fri, Jul 02, 2021, 6:00 PM UTC

dragonwriter wrote: post #335

ttt0 wrote: post #334

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The issue with CRT is that it's anti-white. If we would hold it up to the same standard as something like for example the Culture of Critique.

> The issue with CRT is that it's anti-white. That's not the issue previously claimed but, like it, also false. CRT is not anti-White.

No, this is exactly what my claim was. That the same criticism of racism applies to CRT too.

From CNN: https://edition.cnn.com/2020/10/01/us/critical-race-theory-e...

> Critical race theorists believe that racism is an everyday experience for most people of color, and that a large part of society has no interest in doing away with it because it benefits White elites.

I could say a very similar thing about the Jewish people and you'd call me an anti-semite for it.

Is this another case of redefining words and "anti-white" no longer means what I think it means or what? I'm confused.

edit: I'm rate limited, responding here.

> only in the sense that “White elites” are “elites, who are predominantly White” and not “Whites, who as a group are elites”.

No serious person claims that this or other ethnicity is an elite as a group, so I'm not sure what does it have to do with anything.

> Well, because factually socioeconomic elites (in America) aren't overwhelmingly Jewish

Biden's cabinet being 1/3 Jewish (pretty sure it was about half few months ago) is just one example. And they're like what, 2% of the US population? Is that just an antisemitic lie or is the US administration somehow not a part of systemic structure?

Once again, people are worried about CRT causing unintentional antisemitism, but no one cares if it's going to cause anti-white hatred, despite that the exact same argument was used against others who tried to explain why things are like this. It's completely transparent what it is and any sane person can see through this gaslighting. But it's alright, if you want to genocide each other then I guess it's none of my business, since I live on the other end of the world and it doesn't involve me personally. I'm not sure myself why I care so much, I clearly shouldn't. Now go ahead and crucify me.

Re: Google reports soaring attrition among Black women

#338

Post by slumdev » Fri, Jul 02, 2021, 6:14 PM UTC

staticman2 wrote: post #238

dahfizz wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a retort I see online a lot, and it is not a good one. When people say how its dangerous to voice opinions nowadays, they aren't using medieval Europe as a reference point (where it was also very dangerous to voice unpopular opinions). The reference point people use is their own experiences online from ~10 years ago. People used to be able to say whatever they wanted online, and now doing so is dangerous. You…

I feel quite confident there are unpopular opinions from 10 years ago that would land you in trouble. "People used to say whatever they wanted" is hyperbole.

None of these statements were even controversial twenty years ago:

"Sex and gender are the same; they are immutable; and there are only two of them."

"Every child has a right to a mother and a father."

"An individual can't change his race."

"China is the world's worst human rights transgressor and currency manipulator."

Re: Google reports soaring attrition among Black women

#339

Post by bmn__ » Fri, Jul 02, 2021, 6:16 PM UTC

tomp wrote: post #110

marcus_holmes wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm learning German at the moment. Everything is gendered. Such a strange way of looking at the world. And the unfortunate "das Mädchen" [0] - the German word for "young woman" is neutral gender (because it's a compound noun and the "-chen" suffix is neutral). I wonder how that affects German society when all young women are objects. Does this de-emphasise their femininity, or increase their "sexual object"-ness? [0]…

Theres also “das kind” (the child). And I’m sure other examples. You simply don’t understand how other languages work, and you’re projecting your own ideas onto them. And German is a whole different class than Latin and Slavic languages - AFAIK there’s now way to “tell” the gender of a word in German. In contrast, in Spanish, Italian (not sure about French) and Slovenian words actually “sound” either feminine or masc…

> AFAIK there’s now way to “tell” the gender of a word in German

That's incorrect, there are rules. (These rules have a few exceptions.)

m: -en, -er, -ig, -ismus, -ist, -ling, -m, -or

f: -ät, -e, -ei, -enz, -heit, -ie, -ik, -in, -ion, -keit, -schaft, -ung, -ur

n: -chen, -lein, -ment, -nis, -tum, -um

That makes the proposed contrast weaker than you initially thought.

Re: Google reports soaring attrition among Black women

#340

Post by dragonwriter » Fri, Jul 02, 2021, 6:20 PM UTC

ttt0 wrote: post #337

dragonwriter wrote: post #335

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The issue with CRT is that it's anti-white. That's not the issue previously claimed but, like it, also false. CRT is not anti-White.

No, this is exactly what my claim was. That the same criticism of racism applies to CRT too. From CNN: https://edition.cnn.com/2020/10/01/us/critical-race-theory-e... > Critical race theorists believe that racism is an everyday experience for most people of color, and that a large part of society has no interest in doing away with it because it benefits White elites. I could say a very similar thing about the Jewish…

To the extent that description by CNN is approximately correct and relevant, it is only in the sense that “White elites” are “elites, who are predominantly White” and not “Whites, who as a group are elites”.

> I could say a very similar thing about the Jewish people and you'd call me an anti-semite for it.

Well, because factually socioeconomic elites (in America) aren't overwhelmingly Jewish, and we don’t factually have systematic structures favoring disfavoring the non-Jewish throughout society established for the benefit of the elite and protected because they serve the interest of the elites, so, yes ,if you substituted “Jewish” for “White” in what was previously a factually accurate account of structural power dynamics in the US, I would probably accuse you of inventing lies whose most probable motigation was anti-Semitism.