Google Fires Employee Behind Controversial Diversity Memo • Hacker News Board

Re: Google Fires Employee Behind Controversial Diversity Memo

#191

Post by 0xCMP » Tue, Aug 08, 2017, 2:17 AM UTC

sadface wrote: post #94

maxxxxx wrote: post #12

This is starting to be scary. Instead of government companies are acting as thought police. I think a lot of people will watch what they are saying publicly from now on.

Good. People should be thinking twice. Freedom of Speech is not the same thing as Freedom from Consequences. Unless we decide that being "aggressively antisocial" should be a protected class, private companies should have every right to fire employees who they deem toxic for their culture.

This comment, forgive the pun, makes me very sad. I’m all for doing something to fight the ideas in this guy’s paper, but to advocate for personal censorship as apparently some sort of ideal is beyond my support.

Re: Google Fires Employee Behind Controversial Diversity Memo

#192

Post by bronz » Tue, Aug 08, 2017, 2:17 AM UTC

i absolutely hate the situation that we have found ourselves in. gender and race politics have become totally divorced from the issues of gender and race. firing people who speak their mind is not going to help women in tech and it wont help black kids from being shot in the street in chicago or oakland. not a single person i have ever known who played the politically correct game has ever lifted a single finger to help black people or a little girls interested in tech. the sad truth is that gender politics is now a game of virtue signalling -- a status game among liberal people to see who is the most virtuous, the kindest and most thoughtful. meanwhile, any person who does not fit into a beneficiary position in this game (for example the entire middle section of the united states) is treated with savage cruelty. it is astonishing to see my ultra liberal friends whine endlessly about how unfair life is, how painful life is for certain people, and then turn around and in the same breath condemn and disparage millions of people for absolutely no reason. the truth is that a truly kind person reserves kindness for everyone, and even someone who might be mean or unpleasant at first -- i have found that kindness is much more effective at changing peoples perspective than anything else, so if you want mid-westerners to stop being racist, remember that being horrible and mean to them probably wont make them see things from your perspective.

i think there is some kind of effect where people who are really good at solving complicated puzzles that are right in front of their faces are not so good at solving logical issues that are less tangible or more long term. thats one of my theories, because a lot of people i know that arent dumb at all seem to totally buy into the gender politics thing, even though their beliefs totally fly in the face of logic. maybe its me who is wrong, and there is some subtle aspect of this whole thing that i am not grasping. either way, we are all in this together. its important to be patient with each other and to never allow ourselves to descend into savagery and hatred. and if you do find yourself behaving like that, its ok. we all make mistakes, dust yourself off and try again. i know i have.

Re: Google Fires Employee Behind Controversial Diversity Memo

#193

Post by jasonwatkinspdx » Tue, Aug 08, 2017, 2:17 AM UTC

mvdwoord wrote: post #61

zorpner wrote: post #25

Good. I get that HN is not into this, but this employee stated, bluntly, that they don't believe many of their colleagues should be there because of their sex. Every peer review, every no-hire, every interaction , is and should be suspect. Happy where I am now, but future interviews will include me asking what management would do about this, and termination is the only correct answer. This is textbook hostile environ…

So you're going to ask management what they are going to do about someone who is stating well accepted scientific facts [1]? I hope we never become colleagues. [1] http://quillette.com/2017/08/07/google-memo-four-scientists-...

I don't think you read your own link well enough:

> "Sex researchers recognize that these differences are not inherently supportive of sexism or stratifying opportunities based on sex. It is only because a group of individuals have chosen to interpret them that way, and to subsequently deny the science around them, that we have to have this conversation at a public level." -- Dr. Debra W Soh

The problem is the author is repeating a pattern common in these discussions, where some kernels of empirically supported science are used to justify opinions unsupported by them. That we can measure some differences in MRI in no way establishes that under-representation of women in tech is a result of biological inevitability. We know for certain this isn't the case due to history itself, as well as variation in representation by location and culture.

Re: Google Fires Employee Behind Controversial Diversity Memo

#194

Post by dbjacobs » Tue, Aug 08, 2017, 2:17 AM UTC

wildmusings wrote: post #35

The author's arguments have been completely misrepresented. He pointed out widely-believed and sometimes scientifically-established differences in the DISTRIBUTION OF traits in men and women. He said that those differences make attempts to achieve numerical parity misguided, discriminatory, and harmful. What is his conclusion about how we should behave? "Treat people as individuals, not as just another member of thei…

"Discrimination to reach equal representation is unfair, divisive, and bad for business." -- is asserted as an absolute but never substantiated and was his downfall I believe.

If he had instead said that Google should focus on addressing these biases that hurt minorities and women and as they take affect and demonstrate their effectiveness allow the affirmative action style discrimination to be reduced. He would have gotten a much better reception.

Re: Google Fires Employee Behind Controversial Diversity Memo

#195

Post by jaredklewis » Tue, Aug 08, 2017, 2:17 AM UTC

wildmusings wrote: post #35

The author's arguments have been completely misrepresented. He pointed out widely-believed and sometimes scientifically-established differences in the DISTRIBUTION OF traits in men and women. He said that those differences make attempts to achieve numerical parity misguided, discriminatory, and harmful. What is his conclusion about how we should behave? "Treat people as individuals, not as just another member of thei…

You reposted your comment, so I'll repost my reply:

What are these well known and scientifically established differences in the distribution of traits between men and women?

The research linked in the the document are based on The Big Five Personality Traits: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Five_personality_traits

These traits are measured with self-report surveys. I.e. personality quizzes. Not to malign the field of psychology, but this isn't the gold standard of science, IMHO.

Having read Mr. Damore's document, I can find very little in it of substance. It deals with politics and gender in only the very broadest of terms. It does not delve deeply into the scientific issues at hand, instead sprinkling his platitudes with wikipedia links to give them weight.

That being said, I completely agree that the US's nasty brand of liberalism is in a sad state. Our response to this manifesto should have been a cold critique of its many flaws, not the blind hysteria we've apparently opted for instead.

Re: Google Fires Employee Behind Controversial Diversity Memo

#196

Post by CPAhem » Tue, Aug 08, 2017, 2:17 AM UTC

Dare I say, but people should be employed for their abilities not their gender, race or value to some checklist.

Those who develop greater abilities through study should find greater opportunities in work, regardless of their gender, race, sexual orientation or negative score on some diversity checklist.

Re: Google Fires Employee Behind Controversial Diversity Memo

#197

Post by syshum » Tue, Aug 08, 2017, 2:19 AM UTC

cthulha wrote: post #63

maxxxxx wrote: post #12

This is starting to be scary. Instead of government companies are acting as thought police. I think a lot of people will watch what they are saying publicly from now on.

I don't think you've thought this through. Maybe read the article and other informed commentary such as this ex-Googler: https://medium.com/@yonatanzunger/so-about-this-googlers-man...

I found this to be a pretty good rebuttal to that

https://medium.com/@silverstrike/i-like-how-you-portray-the-...

The summary at the end of

"Get over yourself. You are not as special as you believe yourself to be.

At that point, I gave up on your pathetic and emotional diatribe. Your piece is devoid of any logic, reason, or sense and serves as a way for you to virtue-signal to the rest of the world how much of a “stand-up guy” you are."

Is spot on how I read that Medium post.

I found nothing of value in the Ex Googler's commentary.

Re: Google Fires Employee Behind Controversial Diversity Memo

#198

Post by dropstickle » Tue, Aug 08, 2017, 2:19 AM UTC

cthulha wrote: post #180

adbge wrote: post #7

An excellent opportunity to re-read PG's essay, "What You Can't Say". [1] "What scares me is that there are moral fashions too. They're just as arbitrary, and just as invisible to most people. But they're much more dangerous. Fashion is mistaken for good design; moral fashion is mistaken for good. Dressing oddly gets you laughed at. Violating moral fashions can get you fired, ostracized, imprisoned, or even killed."…

You might want to read Slavoj Zizek on ideology, since that's a deeper philosophical look at the same phenomena. Here's the quick video of him explaining it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pk8ibrfXvpQ Basically, you might think about one thing as 'moral fashion' and another as 'social good', but you are really comparing two fashions and pretending to be objective. To make a concrete example out of the situation in f…

If diverse companies perform better, this would surely mean that there is some sort of difference between the sexes? How else could diversity have an impact on the bottom line of a company?

Re: Google Fires Employee Behind Controversial Diversity Memo

#199

Post by donohoe » Tue, Aug 08, 2017, 2:20 AM UTC

hardwaresofton wrote: post #30

Yep, after reading the public response provided by Google's new Vice President of Diversity, Integrity & Governance ( https://gizmodo.com/exclusive-heres-the-full-10-page-anti-di... ) I was pretty sure this was all that was left. Regardless of whether you agreed with the letter or not, it's 100% correct in asserting that it's super difficult to have productive, rational conversations about the issue of diversity. Goo…

That was the opening point.

Everything beyond that was wrong and wandered into the realm of offensive, and creating a hostile environment.

Re: Google Fires Employee Behind Controversial Diversity Memo

#200

Post by wyclif » Tue, Aug 08, 2017, 2:20 AM UTC

InclinedPlane wrote: post #97

wyclif wrote: post #31

Fun fact: the author of the memo earned a PhD in Biology from Harvard. Google can fire him and get away with it, but it's going to be tough, very tough, for him to be falsely characterized as someone who is misinformed or unscientific. And the court of public opinion may well be more important in this controversy than any court of law.

What does that have to do with anything? Do you think having an advanced degree makes you invulnerable to common biases or errors in reasoning? Do you think that having a STEM degree makes someone knowledgeable in issues of sociology? Ben Carson is a very accomplished neurosurgeon, and yet he has enormous gaping voids in his knowledge of other subjects.

I didn't say he was infallible. He could be wrong. I'm talking about academic credibility—and he has it.

a STEM degree

A STEM PhD from Harvard. FTFY. And comparing James Damore to Ben Carson is, frankly, absurd. James Damore is not a politician, he's a scientist. He's not some yahoo in a comment thread, arguing with academics and professionals in their field from his parent's basement.