Live data from Hacker News

Religious Discrimination at Google

cajundiscordian.medium.com

181–190 of 320 posts

Re: Religious Discrimination at Google

#181
post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's such a bad take, and I'm not even religious. This is the utmost lack of respect for another person that we should strive to stray very very far away from. Also, if you would know anything at all about religion (from context, I assume you mean Christianity), they don't believe that one book trumps all of human science at all -- taking the text literally is a relatively modern take done by very few branches of i…

I feel that everyone should be free to believe what they want. It’s just that if you start talking to me like Jaweh, Zeus, Allah or the Flying Spaghetti Monster are real, you loose some credibility with me. I can think of many things on the spot that have the same level of evidence as you have for your $GOD but such a conversation just doesn’t make sense to me. I prefer to spend my time otherwise.

> I feel that everyone should be free to believe what they want.

Why?

Re: Religious Discrimination at Google

#182
Maybe what other people in the comments don't get is the confusion religious people have in tech workplace.

On one hand we get constantly "educated" that we should not have biases, on the other hand biase against religious people all around and promoted.

Im a in the closet christian working in tech and i heard weekly peoples atheistic point of view bashing religion.

Example of things that i heard: "I don't like X politician because his wife is a pastor" "I am atheist because my family is inteligent" "We should ban religion" "Religious institutions should not own property"

Re: Religious Discrimination at Google

#183
Something I haven't seen anyone bring up yet:

The author works for Google's "Responsible AI" division. I would very strongly hope that religious people would be welcome there, obviously along with atheists and people or all origins or backgrounds. AIs will soon have very real power over average people's lives. Humanity needs to make sure we get it right.

His 2 main points are:

- religious people being treated without respect or osctracized

- algorithmic bias against religion in Google products

As with all these past discussions (see Timnit Gebru), it's hard to know whether he's really being treated unfairly unless you somehow know him in person. Some people have personality disorders that make them insufferable to work with, religious or not. Personally he seems well-adjusted; it doesn't look like he was trying to proselitize or evangelize; he brought up religious discrimination in passing, was asked to explain what he meant, and privately explained. I don't know why so many here are assuming he's walking around Google asking people if they've heard of "our Lord and Saviour".

>I mentioned that I stood against all sorts of discrimination at Google and listed religious discrimination as one of them. He asked for examples so I privately messaged him with some and he began trying to “educate” me about how those weren’t religious discrimination; they were just signs that I was suffering from “victim syndrome”.

The second issue he brings up (that he says he needs to discuss with a lawyer before he can give concrete examples) also seems plausible enough. Google admits to downranking independent news organisations, politically non-mainstream outfits (socialists[0], subsets of social justice activists, nationalists); given how atheistic most Google employees are, it's plausible that the same would apply to religion. There is also a documented history of religious bias in Google Assistant[1].

If what he's claiming is true, it's indefensible. Algorithms shouldn't have an anti-religious bias. Think: algorithms for hiring, parole/sentencing, or personality testing. Religious discimination isn't a hypothetical, there are people being killed or discriminated against today in various countries because they belong to minority faiths. AIs shouldn't participate in that.

As an interesting tidbit: here's what Marget Mitchell (co-founded Microsoft Research's Cognition group, Google Research's ML Fairness group, fired from Google shortly after Timnit Gebru) said about the author (Lemoine):

> When new people would join Google who were interested in ethics, Mitchell used to introduce them to Lemoine. “I’d say, ‘You should talk to Blake because he’s Google’s conscience,’ ” said Mitchell, who compared Lemoine to Jiminy Cricket. “Of everyone at Google, he had the heart and soul of doing the right thing.”

[0]: https://www.michigandaily.com/viewpoints/op-ed-why-google-ce...

[1]: https://www.newsweek.com/google-censoring-jesus-knows-buddha...

Re: Religious Discrimination at Google

#184
post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are at a meeting with colleagues, one colleague suddenly starts to insist that Santa Claus is real. Do you take them seriously? Sure it’s freedom of speech but there will be some kind of drop in respect. I mean I get that you believe that one book trumps all of human science because you were raised that way but when you grow up your critical thinking skills should kick in. If they don’t, it’s very difficult to ke…

Your equation of Santa Claus with God reveals your prejudice and stereotyping of religious people. As another commenter has said, many great scientific discoveries over history have been made by Christians. It would be wrong of me to deny that there is an anti-intellectual strain in Christianity but it is not the dominant trend that American media would like to espouse. Whether you think Christianity is sensible or n…

> Your equation of Santa Claus with God reveals your prejudice and stereotyping of religious people.

The person you're replying to never equated Santa Claus with any kind god. It was just a question. Would you take an adult insisting Santa Claus is real seriously? Do you think people are entitled to their beliefs, whatever they may be?

Re: Religious Discrimination at Google

#185
post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your equation of Santa Claus with God reveals your prejudice and stereotyping of religious people. As another commenter has said, many great scientific discoveries over history have been made by Christians. It would be wrong of me to deny that there is an anti-intellectual strain in Christianity but it is not the dominant trend that American media would like to espouse. Whether you think Christianity is sensible or n…

> Your equation of Santa Claus with God reveals your prejudice and stereotyping of religious people. The person you're replying to never equated Santa Claus with any kind god. It was just a question. Would you take an adult insisting Santa Claus is real seriously? Do you think people are entitled to their beliefs, whatever they may be?

They didn’t explicitly state it but it’s heavily implied based on the context.

No, I wouldn’t take an adult believing in Santa Claus seriously. They’re entitled to their beliefs and if they do their job well then I have no reason to have an issue with them.

The issue I take is with the equivocation they have made. Believing in Santa Claus and believing in a divine entity are two drastically different things.

Re: Religious Discrimination at Google

#186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Princess Alice experiments are evidence for the alternative rationale that belief in invisible God-like beings who impose rules is a useful trait for early civilisations which have inadequate oversight for their members. Superstitious people will obey rules with no actual enforcement out of a mistaken belief that an invisible Deity might punish them for disobedience, this benefits the rest of their society, at le…

It's a rational looking theory, but is there any evidence that superstitious people exhibit more ethical behaviors? I have the impression that since those people are not bound by evidences they can justify unethical behavior much more easily. And so this trait that should make them more ethical actually backfires and enable worse behavior.

Ah, Princess Alice doesn't check for ethical behaviour it checks for obedience.

This shows that religion could perform a valuable function in a pre-historic human society independent of whether it's true.

Re: Religious Discrimination at Google

#187
post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are at a meeting with colleagues, one colleague suddenly starts to insist that Santa Claus is real. Do you take them seriously? Sure it’s freedom of speech but there will be some kind of drop in respect. I mean I get that you believe that one book trumps all of human science because you were raised that way but when you grow up your critical thinking skills should kick in. If they don’t, it’s very difficult to ke…

Comparing one’s religious beliefs with believing in the existence of Santa Clause misses the point completely and it validates what the author of the article is saying, i.e. that contempt for religion and, in the end, religious discrimination, is widespread in tech circles. (if it matters I’m an atheist myself)

Contempt for all religion is only pushing christian values further. Polytheistic religions incorporated every new Gods, as they all could very well exist. Then a new religion appeared and decided only one god existed and other gods did not. Athon and his clergy then died with the pharaoh pushing him, but around the same time, a new religion appeared in the middle east, led by a certain Moses(weirdly, an Egyptian name given to those destined to a clerical life)(probably an Athon priest imho, but i could be wrong).

  Lot of stuff happens, it appears that divine right+monotheism is better than polytheism for population control (reason why and how Islamic faith spread amongst the ruling class of adjacent countries).

Contempt for all religions but the one from the book, and contempt for all religions are not really different. I just decided that .1% is a rounding error when deciding gods existence. I do respect polytheism more.

Re: Religious Discrimination at Google

#188

This is funny to me as someone who participates in Christians @ Google and weekly prayer. The few coworkers outside of that who know of my faith are very accepting. I have never personally experienced any kind of discrimination, but perhaps I could have if I had different teammates.

You sound humble. Perhaps people don't feel the need to attack you for your religion because you're not attempting to cram it down their throat.

Re: Religious Discrimination at Google

#189
post #2

The author and Google are being discussed at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31704063

So it sounds like they think Google's chatbot is sentient? ...okay.

He's not the only Google engineer to believe we're uncomfortably close:

https://www.economist.com/by-invitation/2022/06/09/artificia...

Given how vibrant the academic/philosophical discussions of AI and consciousness have been for decades now, it's anti-intellectual to pretend there are any obvious answers.

We're headed towards a dilemma where most scientists claim categorically that a given AI/robot is non-conscious, but most layment think it is. If robots start behaving and talking like in Detroit: Become Human, won't people react with sympathy? Who cares if the behavior is purely imitative and non-conscious, how could we tell the difference?

Read this, and tell me honestly that you can objectively, beyond a shadow of any doubt make a conclusion either way: https://cajundiscordian.medium.com/is-lamda-sentient-an-inte...

Re: Religious Discrimination at Google

#190
post #9

In this article, the author doesn't provide any concrete example of the religious discrimination that he's allegedly experienced, or how it's impacted him in any way. It seems that he's very eager to play the victim. A good example of his rush to victimhood is when he tells how he confronted leadership about why Google hasn't opened an engineering office in Louisiana. He seems to take the fact that Google doesn't hav…

Let me replace the word religious with racial: "In this article, the author doesn't provide any concrete example of the racial discrimination that he's allegedly experienced, or how it's impacted him in any way. It seems that he's very eager to play the victim." Sounds familiar now doesn't it? Claims like that have been dismissed for decades. Don't be so quick to get on the dismissal train.

Exactly. That's why published articles about racial discrimination at the workplace do contain evidence. Hell, the last on i read contained transcripts of recorded discussions, transcripts of Whatsapp discussions, and still commenters were like 'its not a proof that the police is racist'.
Post reply on HN