Live data from Hacker News

Google cancelled a talk on caste bias

washingtonpost.com

861–870 of 1001 posts

Re: Google cancelled a talk on caste bias

#861
post #244
post #65

Question from a layman. How does one know that someone is from another caste? If I was someone from India, how would I know what caste my fellow Indian is from? Is there some kind of code? Or where you are from?

Aside from last names, diet is a big giveaway. If someone is vegetarian, it is highly likely that they come from the so called "upper" castes. In certain interpretations of Hinduism, which are now becoming the dominant ones in India, meat is considered polluting. If you eat meat, you are dirty, and this "dirtiness" is at the root of why some castes are still considered untouchable.

They do not consider eating meat 'dirty' as much as they consider it 'violent'.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ahimsa

Re: Google cancelled a talk on caste bias

#862

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not Quite. The people i have referenced are experts/scholars in this field (and non-Indians to boot) so you can be sure that it is as close to factual as you can get. The Wikipedia page contains links to their papers/books which you can refer for edification.

> The people i have referenced are experts/scholars in this field (and non-Indians to boot) so you can be sure that it is as close to factual as you can get. The Wikipedia page contains links to their papers/books which you can refer for edification. What are the cliff notes, because every time I bring this up here one gets accused of being a bigot and missing the nuances of what is essentially nepotism and racism th…

My advice is to use your commonsense. Almost all of what you have seen/experienced can be explained by one Human Animal trying to "eat" another within our Cultural/Social frameworks using whatever means is available at hand. Thus you can have Nepotism, Favouritism, Spitefulness, Back-stabbing, Victim role-playing etc. You have to figure it out based on the person and the context. Don't jump to preconceived notions like Casteism which has a very low probability amongst educated Indians.

PS: The study of the subject itself is fascinating and you can start with the wikipedia page i have referenced and then follow the links from there.

Re: Google cancelled a talk on caste bias

#863

Hmm... > To Soundararajan, Google was long overdue for a conversation on caste equity. Pichai, the CEO, “is Indian and he is Brahmin and he grew up in Tamil Nadu. There is no way you grow up in Tamil Nadu and not know about caste because of how caste politics shaped the conversation,” Soundararajan told The Post. “If he can make passionate statements about Google’s [diversity equity and inclusion] commitments in the…

This Soundarajan is a known anti-India baiter. She also trolled Twitter and its CEO for his caste [1].

Google did the right thing by keeping her out.

[1] https://twitter.com/dalitdiva/status/1465358123640655875

Re: Google cancelled a talk on caste bias

#864
post #241

Google’s culture is dominated by arrogance. Management repeatedly tells employees they work on the world’s hardest problems using the world’s biggest computers and the world’s smartest people. Doing anything less is “ungoogley”. It doesn’t necessarily follow that this would encourage racism. But it sure isn’t surprising.

Why would you assume "best" = "racist"? Also - which companies are saying they hire the worst people? I've worked at several companies - every single one of them claimed to hire the best. It's just corporate psychobabble at this point.

When you’re conditioned to think of yourself in a superior class of people, I can easily see how that mindset carries over to nonprofessional circumstances.

Also it’s not recruiting or hiring that I think is relevant. Those activities mostly impact non-employees. It’s in this drumbeat from leadership about prioritization of projects which reminds googlers not to waste their time on simple or small problems (or fixing bugs or maintaining a service) that any non-googler could do. It says “Remember that you’re better than they are.”

Re: Google cancelled a talk on caste bias

#865
post #776

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> but it is the most overt explicit discrimination that I see every week. Could you give some examples?

Yes, Two employees hired via an Indian recruiting firm were not paid wages they were legally entitled to, that my company was paying for, and threatened with cancellation of their visas and legal action in India if they reported the underpayment. In one case my colleague agreed to pay back his last three months wages when he quit to the recruiting firm, not to my company that had already paid the wages. He wasn’t con…

This sounds more related to unfair immigration laws than to caste discrimination.

Re: Google cancelled a talk on caste bias

#866

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's okay to just admit you don't know something. Here's the American Anthropological Association's public outreach site on the subject, so you can catch up on the relevant science. https://understandingrace.org/

This may be where the disconnect is. The definition I provided was from a biology domain and not from humanities domain ( not that there no attempts to do the same in biology ). This is not discredit anthropology as it is a fascinating study. I just do not think it is relevant here. I do happen to think that, where there are clear physical differences ( gasp ) between white and black people, it may be a good idea not…

All of your concerns and questions are addressed in the website, which I recommend that you explore more in depth. The site is not purely from a cultural anthropology point of view, but physical anthropology, as well. As such, it addresses genetics and health issues.

Re: Google cancelled a talk on caste bias

#867

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They are related in that they are both possible forms of discrimination. The spectrum runs from chattel race slavery to ugly people getting laid less. Social class objectively exists, but I think it is disingenuous to say class bias has an impact anywhere close to that of the caste system on life outcomes, or deterministically dictates economic outcomes. There is a loose correlation between class and outcomes, but th…

Whoa - I was with you up until that last sentence. > There is a loose correlation between class and outcomes, My understanding is that the correlation is very strong. > but this also includes perfectly logical factors like better educational attainment, parental nurturing, support, crime, and drug use. The right question is about social mobility. If you're born in a poor family, what is the chance that you'll escape…

>My understanding is that the correlation is very strong.

Look at the table that I shared. A very strong correlation would look like:

  Bottom 20% > bottom 20% = 100%

  Next  20% > Next 20% = 100%

  ....

  Top 20% > top 20% = 100% 
Pure randomness, (e.g no class impact whatsoever) would look like:

  Bottom 20% > bottom 20% = 20%

  Next  20% > Next 20% = 20%

  ....

  Top 20% > top 20% = 20%  
What we see is far closer to the latter than the former. Another way to put this is every single group in America is more likely to end up in a different economic quintile than the one they were born in!

>In the USA today, a child in the bottom 20% of the income distribution only has a 7% chance to ever reach the top 20% of the income distribution.

What do you think that 7% would be in an ideal world? 7% sounds small, but keep in mind that in a system where birth class had no impact whatsoever, 7% would become 3x higher to 20%. Also, keep in mind that this is the absolute worst case for all of USA and a tiny part of the big picture. E.g. the most capable 20% of the bottom 20% don't make it all the way to where they would under a fair system 60% of the time (this is about 2% of the population). Most people (numerically) have very little impact from class.

>From a purely selfish perspective, if tomorrow's Einstein is born poor in america today, its very unlikely they will ever be able to make use of their talent to aid the world.

This is hyperbolic. If they were born in the bottom 20%, and not part of the majority that bottom 20% that escape poverty, maybe. Keep in mind that the real Einstein was born into the 1% in Germany, son of a factory owner, not a chimney sweep.

>Poor people stay uneducated and poor.

This is objectively not true. Most people born in the bottom quintile escape the bottom quintile, as demonstrated by the data.

I agree that more should be done to help those borne into poverty, but this fatalistic attitude does not match reality. There are some noteworthy effects of birth class, primarily in the most extreme situations, but most Americans are unaffected. For those borne into poverty, we know what factors generally increase mobility. If you stay in school, off of drugs, and keep a clean criminal record, chances are very likely you will escape the bottom quintile. I think more effort should go into helping people do these simple things, and less effort should be spent spreading the idea that outcomes are determined by birth.

Re: Google cancelled a talk on caste bias

#868

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So you have no evidence, he has evidence, and your argument is simply "I don't believe you." These are the same forum discussion strategies of white nationalists, and this has been a fascinating thread to read!

I wrote; >their veracity cannot be taken on faith If you think what he "claims" is evidence, i have a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you. I will place my decade and a half of working experience across half a dozen companies in the US over any anonymous person's "evidence".

I’ve worked in the technology departments of major American investment banks you’ve heard of. I’ve seen Indian colleagues openly discuss caste and speculate someone’s caste based on their name and regional background openly in the company cafe

Re: Google cancelled a talk on caste bias

#869

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course. Women are not physiologically better at QA than other roles in tech companies. That's it. That's 100% of the information required to determine that this is the result of sexism. However, a lot of people seem to think that describing reality is an insult to them, so I have to explain further - this is a result of systemic sexism starting at early childhood. It starts with what toys children are given to pla…

People don't fit into the workplace based upon their physiological capability to grasp the highest role. You need more information than that to determine systemic sexism . People have free will, life circumnstances seperate to corporate goals and a nature. You can track a bias towards food and water that starts from birth and runs through all of society. We don't explain the lack of people in deserts as systemic wate…

What is this mysterious "nature of people" that is neither physiological nor the result of learned behavior?

Re: Google cancelled a talk on caste bias

#870

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Non-white groups lag in almost all economic categories. Why are the data for Asian people not shown on those graphs? It only lists Black, Hispanic, and White. Is it because (at least according to the stats on Wikipedia[0], sourced from the US Census) they don't reinforce that narrative? In fact, according to that data, the median white income is ~$66K, which is surpassed by Ghanaians (~$69K), South Africans (~$98K),…

The data for asian americans isn't shown on that graph because the underlying data used for the graph groups people into white, black, hispanic, and other. I apologize for saying "non-white" when I really meant "black and/or hispanic". Yes, there are some ethnic groups that have higher median incomes, but that doesn't mean there isn't a racial disparity in america. The fact of the matter is that african americans, as…

If a person believes this is due to some "inherent racial trait", they're a racist, plain and simple.

From this I think you're (a) allowing that there might be cultural differences correlated with race that are causative; and (b) expressing that it's flatly impossible that there could be (statistically on average) genetic differences that contribute to greater or lesser success depending on the prevailing environment.

Point (b) sounds like a denial of the mechanisms of evolution that we have high confidence are correct, and Lysenkoism more generally. It's not that (b) is necessarily true, but your implication that it cannot possibly be true (or at least that admitting it's true makes one the worst sort of monster) is shutting science out of the discussion before it can even be consulted.

Post reply on HN