Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Google’s caste-bias problem

newyorker.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 291 posts

Re: Google’s caste-bias problem

#111

Post by arvindamirtaa »

remflight wrote: post #101
arvindamirtaa wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you haven't experienced something, and think someone else claiming that they experienced it is stupid, I really don't know who is stupid. If person A slaps person B and person C goes "I didn't experience anything. There are no slaps in this company", does that sound reasonable?

Deleted

Your assertion that it's not, is not sufficient. Especially when the very idea of having a talk caused so much tension. If it's a non existent problem, this talk would've been given no more attention than a presentation about bigfoot.

Such (pro)active denial usually indicates the denier has something to hide. Now that may not be the case here. But assuming you're right about this not being a Google problem but just small pockets like sexual harassment and racism.

Doesn't google still hold talks about racism & sexual harassment? I'm pretty sure they do. So why the voice against this talk, and this issue specifically?

Re: Google’s caste-bias problem

#112

Post by hellohowareu »

remflight wrote: post #52

Deleted because it’s clear I won’t change anyones mind. People who want to believe that Google is guilty, will believe they are guilty no matter what.

No offense, but your perspective does not sound open minded.

I'd recommend being open to other, unexplored (by you) possibilities, since one person cannot be everywhere at once, nor understand the experiences of everyone at Gigantic Mega Corp (100k+ people).

I think having a perspective closed to unexplored possibilities is arguably a good definition of naive.

"na·ive /nīˈēv/ Learn to pronounce adjective (of a person or action) showing a lack of experience, wisdom, or judgment. "the rather naive young man had been totally misled" (of a person) natural and unaffected; innocent."

That said, I think you have good intentions-- You appreciate your employer. But that said-- this likely also results in certain biases.

Re: Google’s caste-bias problem

#113

Post by tptacek »

remflight wrote: post #52

Deleted because it’s clear I won’t change anyones mind. People who want to believe that Google is guilty, will believe they are guilty no matter what.

Isn't the whole point of edgy humor that it's unsafe? If it's humor you can deploy in any situation without fear of durably offending people, it's not edgy; it's safe, practically by definition.

Re: Google’s caste-bias problem

#114

Post by boucher »

remflight wrote: post #101
arvindamirtaa wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you haven't experienced something, and think someone else claiming that they experienced it is stupid, I really don't know who is stupid. If person A slaps person B and person C goes "I didn't experience anything. There are no slaps in this company", does that sound reasonable?

Deleted

I could play the same game and say perhaps you didn't read the article.

The article doesn't suggest it is a problem unique to Google. It suggests that Google's efforts at DEI, which you are telling us are industry best, have a blind spot on this subject, as evidenced by the way they handled this situation. A story that sounds plausible to me.

Re: Google’s caste-bias problem

#115

Post by JumpCrisscross »

India is going through a ethnic nationalist revival. That creates a victimhood complex in which criticism is taken as animosity towards the group, whether that be all Indians or Hindu Indians.

So I can see someone who is not themselves discriminating on the basis of caste taking offence to someone suggesting it exists. Add Google’s elitist culture (nothing wrong with that per se, but it creates blind spots) and I can see how reasonable people may conclude the problem doesn’t exist.

That said, internal activism is unlikely to be effective. By the time it worked for e.g. racism, it was an established problem in popular opinion and the law. Companies generally aren’t at the vanguard of social change.

We need legislation and case law. In that respect, firing the organiser was a strategic blunder—it frees her to meaningfully penalise Google.

Re: Google’s caste-bias problem

#116

Post by nojito »

40acres wrote: post #34

How would a non Indian person even tell? Is it really all in the last name? I've worked with a fair amount of Indian folks with a wide variety of names - how would you even go about determining someone's caste? Based on this article it sounds like most people who end up in Big Tech will be upper caste.

It’s done through seemingly simple questions.

Usually dealing with what city they are from, what city are your parents from, are you vegetarian, are you having dessert?

I've never experienced or seen the thread searching. Larger person grabs your shoulder to see if the thread is there. But that wouldn't surprise me at all.

Re: Google’s caste-bias problem

#117

Post by trashtester »

AuthorizedHelp wrote: post #16

I always find it funny how there are massive east asian only groups in all major corporate entities. This is not diversity, this is racism. Nice work FANG.

Maybe, but it could also be the reverse. I few years ago, I was hiring for some Data Engineering positions in a European country, and highly disproportional part of the most qualified applicants were Chinese, but with below average language skills. (Chinese people are a VERY small minority in the general population in my country.)

I would expect many companies to not consider many of them, due to the communication limitations. That would mean that those who ignored those issues could get a LOT of them, and possibly at a lower-than-average salary, for their technical ability.

Re: Google’s caste-bias problem

#119

Post by jrsj »

Aunche wrote: post #98
jrsj wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If Google doesn't have a blind spot towards caste bias than why where they unable to even have a talk about it? It seems like it's a topic that cannot be discussed and as such I really doubt it doesn't represent a problem

I'm guessing that Google is also unlikely to host a topic about black-on-black violence. I'm not saying that this is a fair comparison, but that's what many Indians how caste is used. If you're going to place high importance on people's subjective experiences, you can't only do so when it's politically convenient.

Not only is it not a good comparison but there's not even a good thing to compare it to, which would be some other form of discrimination happening within the work place that can't be discussed. What you're saying sounds to me like this problem does exist and it's so bad that even talking about it should be off limits. That's fundamentally unfair to the people potentially being discriminated against.

Re: Google’s caste-bias problem

#120

Post by andsoitis »

hcarvalhoalves wrote: post #46

Here’s my take: It seems an increasing disbelief in politics and democracy has moved these discussions from public forums to private companies. This is problematic, as it’s not in a private company interest to promote discussion (even if it’s pretending to do so, for PR or legal reasons), neither is it a power equilibrium since a company can just fire you at will.

> not in a private company interest to promote discussion

Isn't it in a company's interest to nurture an environment where everyone they hire can thrive?

Post reply on HN