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

Outraged about the Google diversity memo?

backreaction.blogspot.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 872 posts

Re: Outraged about the Google diversity memo?

#11

Post by mef »

mirimir wrote: post #6
mef wrote: post #2

Yet another take on the diversity memo that doesn't mention the systemic sexism that the 50/50 target is intended to offset. The closest she gets is saying that having more women in the field will make their presence unremarkable, which will reduce bias. But what about the institutionalized sexism that prevents so many more women from ever getting anywhere near a job at Google in the first place?

Huh? How about this point that she makes? > The point is, it's obvious we don't live in such a fair world, but one where women are kept from succeeding by sexism. By not hiring them, or not promoting them, or not treating them fairly otherwise, not because they as individuals have flaws, but just because they are women. In this situation, noticing this and attempting to neutralise it is actually beneficial. Edit: Oop…

No, that's in a comment.

Re: Outraged about the Google diversity memo?

#12

Post by l33tbro »

Okay, slipping into my bomb-squad EOD suit to comment on this topic. But, seriously, the more I read about Damore, the more it seems like this was a cunning plan to get fired and then sue the roller-hockey pants off Sergey Brin and Co.

While much has been made of a Harvard education being no substitute for social intelligence, Damore is no slouch and really does just seem like a disgruntled employee who devised an almost surgical peace-out that would ensure he was compensated for life. This will be one interesting lawsuit.

Re: Outraged about the Google diversity memo?

#13

Post by mberning »

I like the discussion. I think the point about software being significantly "people centric" is a bit off base and betrays the authors lack of experience in the field. Working with people is certainly part of the job and in some roles maybe a large portion of the work. Being a good communicator is an important part of being a good developer, but it doesn't make you a good developer. Being a talented and experienced programmer is the foundation on which the rest is built.

Re: Outraged about the Google diversity memo?

#14

Post by mirimir »

mef wrote: post #11
mirimir wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Huh? How about this point that she makes? > The point is, it's obvious we don't live in such a fair world, but one where women are kept from succeeding by sexism. By not hiring them, or not promoting them, or not treating them fairly otherwise, not because they as individuals have flaws, but just because they are women. In this situation, noticing this and attempting to neutralise it is actually beneficial. Edit: Oop…

No, that's in a comment.

Thanks. I was careless in my text search.

Re: Outraged about the Google diversity memo?

#16

Post by btilly »

mirimir wrote: post #4

This is an excellent discussion. I especially love this comment: > I believe for example if it wasn’t for biases and unequal opportunities, then the higher ranks in science and politics would be dominated by women. Hence, aiming at a 50-50 representation gives men an unfair advantage. I challenge you to provide any evidence to the contrary. Because arguably that's where gender differences highlighted in Damore's memo…

I'll take up that challenge with https://www.edge.org/response-detail/10670 which provides quantitative data indicating that male abilities vary more than female ones, and this fact is sufficient to explain why men should be overrepresented in CEO boardrooms and prisons.

Re: Outraged about the Google diversity memo?

#17

Post by lloydde »

ramensea wrote: post #8

I agree that the left and the rights reaction over the memo has been overblown. However I am unsure whether or not you think the Googler's opinion is novel. You state both, "that Damore’s skepticism about current practices is widespread" and "imperfect his attempt, he was fired, in short, for thinking on his own". As someone who works in the tech industry let me tell you his beliefs were not novel. Its a commonly hel…

> This is not how "affirmative action" works. "Affirmative action" states that if you have two "equally" qualified candidates

If you can quantify candidates' capabilities, please start your money printing press.

Re: Outraged about the Google diversity memo?

#19

Post by reitanqild »

jorgemf wrote: post #9

Completely right. I hope this is not banned because it is worth the read.

Whichever side you are on this is probably the most important topic discussed in this forum this week.

It is also very interesting to a large number of the audience.

Yet sadly there seems to be a number of people here who think they have a right to overrule everyone who upvote (and no, I'm not talking about the mods but about the flaggers.)

Re: Outraged about the Google diversity memo?

#20

Post by ebola1717 »

mberning wrote: post #13

I like the discussion. I think the point about software being significantly "people centric" is a bit off base and betrays the authors lack of experience in the field. Working with people is certainly part of the job and in some roles maybe a large portion of the work. Being a good communicator is an important part of being a good developer, but it doesn't make you a good developer. Being a talented and experienced p…

That's a nice theory, but I fail to see any evidence of it. I see lots of people cap out at senior engineer, cause that's how far you can get without having strong technical skills. Staff engineers, tech leads, and managers all get there because they're good communicators, and tbh, in those roles, their engineering skills are secondary.
Post reply on HN