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

Google Grapples with Fallout After Employee Slams Diversity Efforts

npr.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 39 posts

Re: Google Grapples with Fallout After Employee Slams Diversity Efforts

#21

Post by MBCook »

MBCook wrote: post #13
gavanwoolery wrote: post #4

The irony here is the fallout from this memo is exactly what the author was trying to fight against. Most negative reactions I have seen to the memo attempt to shame the author without engaging in any sort of rational counter or discourse. Whether or not the author is "right" is entirely up for debate, but I believe they should be able to at least question the current situation and get logical feedback as to why they…

The person essentially gave ANY woman he works with a gender descrimination suit slam-dunk. Are you a woman? Does he review your code poorly? Did you possibly lose a promotion/bonus because of review scores? You've got a great case. Is he your manager? WOW do you have a great case. Your career is based on peer reviews and he is one of your reviewers? Google is in trouble. I don't think it IS up for debate but no matt…

I'm assuming I was voted down for saying 'it wasn't up for debate'. Fine.

Does anyone disagree that in a discrimination case where the author is a party his 'manifesto' would be a BIG problem? If you disagree, I'd love to hear why. (IANAL)

Re: Google Grapples with Fallout After Employee Slams Diversity Efforts

#22

Post by sebleon »

ceejayoz wrote: post #12
gavanwoolery wrote: post #4

The irony here is the fallout from this memo is exactly what the author was trying to fight against. Most negative reactions I have seen to the memo attempt to shame the author without engaging in any sort of rational counter or discourse. Whether or not the author is "right" is entirely up for debate, but I believe they should be able to at least question the current situation and get logical feedback as to why they…

> Most negative reactions I have seen to the memo attempt to shame the author without engaging in any sort of rational counter or discourse. Likely because it's the same old pseudoscientific Gish Gallop of claims that've been addressed a thousand times before. https://medium.com/@yonatanzunger/so-about-this-googlers-man...

Right, as much as i disagree with many points in the manifesto, i don't think Yonatan Zunger actually read the manifesto before replying.

Re: Google Grapples with Fallout After Employee Slams Diversity Efforts

#23

Post by sebleon »

rpearl wrote: post #20
gavanwoolery wrote: post #4

The irony here is the fallout from this memo is exactly what the author was trying to fight against. Most negative reactions I have seen to the memo attempt to shame the author without engaging in any sort of rational counter or discourse. Whether or not the author is "right" is entirely up for debate, but I believe they should be able to at least question the current situation and get logical feedback as to why they…

The author's claims are not factual. The "biological" bases he asserts as fact are debunked, and not even recently. You say that we should engage with him, but there's nothing of substance there to engage with. So then, we shouldn't tolerate his breach of the "peace treaty" of tolerance. He stepped over a line, and should be socially stigmatized for it. https://extranewsfeed.com/tolerance-is-not-a-moral-precept-1...

Could you provide links to the debunking research?

While not required, engaging with the manifesto's author openly might help convince others like him. He is certainly not alone in this mindset, and if it's easy to point out the faults in this line of reasoning, we should be able to correct this once and for all.

Re: Google Grapples with Fallout After Employee Slams Diversity Efforts

#24

Post by tooltalk »

ceejayoz wrote: post #12
gavanwoolery wrote: post #4

The irony here is the fallout from this memo is exactly what the author was trying to fight against. Most negative reactions I have seen to the memo attempt to shame the author without engaging in any sort of rational counter or discourse. Whether or not the author is "right" is entirely up for debate, but I believe they should be able to at least question the current situation and get logical feedback as to why they…

> Most negative reactions I have seen to the memo attempt to shame the author without engaging in any sort of rational counter or discourse. Likely because it's the same old pseudoscientific Gish Gallop of claims that've been addressed a thousand times before. https://medium.com/@yonatanzunger/so-about-this-googlers-man...

IMO, Zunger's dismissive and "corrosive" response does nothing, but reinforces the original author's point about the majority's oppressive censorship.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2017/08/07/googles-...

Re: Google Grapples with Fallout After Employee Slams Diversity Efforts

#25

Post by rpearl »

sebleon wrote: post #23
rpearl wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The author's claims are not factual. The "biological" bases he asserts as fact are debunked, and not even recently. You say that we should engage with him, but there's nothing of substance there to engage with. So then, we shouldn't tolerate his breach of the "peace treaty" of tolerance. He stepped over a line, and should be socially stigmatized for it. https://extranewsfeed.com/tolerance-is-not-a-moral-precept-1...

Could you provide links to the debunking research? While not required, engaging with the manifesto's author openly might help convince others like him. He is certainly not alone in this mindset, and if it's easy to point out the faults in this line of reasoning, we should be able to correct this once and for all.

1. A claim about universality across human cultures. Demonstrably false: http://s3.amazonaws.com/fieldexperiments-papers2/papers/0004...

2. A sweeping variety of claims about the personality differences of coworkers at his own company and why these differences make it okay for him to discriminate.

Debunked here: https://www.fastcompany.com/40449759/according-to-employee-p...

3. A claim that there is "a bar" which is "lowered" for diversity candidates

Rather, diverse teams are demonstrably more effective than homogeneous teams: https://hbr.org/2016/11/why-diverse-teams-are-smarter, so even if by the author's chosen metrics "the bar" is "lowered", those are not good metrics. There is no single bar, when developing a cooperative group.

4. Various claims about unconscious biases not being the reason for the gender gap It is demonstrable that competence is evaluated with bias: https://www.theladders.com/p/22203/brunette-blonde-women-lea... (links to studies)

It is demonstrable that social factors hold women back more than men: http://www.aauw.org/research/why-so-few/

There's lots of other false claims, but I don't really want to do the digging. I've already engaged with this more than I think to be generally productive. And that's kind of the point: from a comfortable position where the author is not affected by the policies he argues, those who are must defend. For the author, it is a hypothetical. For the attacked, it is not. There is a fundamental asymmetry in any discourse here.

Re: Google Grapples with Fallout After Employee Slams Diversity Efforts

#26

Post by rexicus »

vinhboy wrote: post #5

This is a classic example of why we shouldn't feed the trolls. I am not sure why this letter is getting so much publicity. This view point can be had any day on reddit. Even in places like /r/technology you'll find plenty of people throwing out these ideas. I find it rather boring and cliche.

You can't discuss anything on the Internet anymore, everything is politicized ax-grinding by dishonest people fishing for clicks, personal celebrity, and Patreon money who just ruin the discussion.

Do real journalists still exist that can actually interview some of the parties involved, cut through the tweets and personality, and get both sides of this?

Re: Google Grapples with Fallout After Employee Slams Diversity Efforts

#27

Post by koomi »

tooltalk wrote: post #24
ceejayoz wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Most negative reactions I have seen to the memo attempt to shame the author without engaging in any sort of rational counter or discourse. Likely because it's the same old pseudoscientific Gish Gallop of claims that've been addressed a thousand times before. https://medium.com/@yonatanzunger/so-about-this-googlers-man...

IMO, Zunger's dismissive and "corrosive" response does nothing, but reinforces the original author's point about the majority's oppressive censorship. https://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2017/08/07/googles-...

Agreed. I don't grasp how, in response to a text lamenting a lack of psychological safety and fear of being shamed into silence, a response which essentially states "what you said was stupid, you should never have talked about it and this will have negative consequences for your career" can be considered appropriate, let alone as having a positive impact in any meaningful way.

Re: Google Grapples with Fallout After Employee Slams Diversity Efforts

#28

Post by canoebuilder »

rpearl wrote: post #25
sebleon wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Could you provide links to the debunking research? While not required, engaging with the manifesto's author openly might help convince others like him. He is certainly not alone in this mindset, and if it's easy to point out the faults in this line of reasoning, we should be able to correct this once and for all.

1. A claim about universality across human cultures. Demonstrably false: http://s3.amazonaws.com/fieldexperiments-papers2/papers/0004... 2. A sweeping variety of claims about the personality differences of coworkers at his own company and why these differences make it okay for him to discriminate. Debunked here: https://www.fastcompany.com/40449759/according-to-employee-p... 3. A claim that there is "a bar" which is…

If all these things were true, shouldn't they be demonstrably obvious to everybody, such that their brightly shining obviousness would handily over power whatever -phobia or -ism du jour you think you are battling.

If they were so obviously true why aren't societies' and biologies' natural optimization mechanisms making them unmistakably and obviously true?

If it's really the case that women will do equal work for %X less money than men, why hasn't any organization capitalized on this by hiring only women and drastically reduced their costs?

But if word got out on this strategy thanks to you and your comrades tireless efforts then demand for this cheaper labor would go up and thus it's price would rise.

hmm... this claim seems counter to what we know about market economics.

If it's really the case that "diverse" teams(what's the definition of "diverse"?) are so superior to other configurations, then why aren't the Snaps, Bings, and HTCs of the world making it their number one priority to "diversify" and then demonstrating the shining obviousness of the "diverse" claim by successfully taking on the big bad "undiverse" market leaders.

Why do you think it is the purview of SJW brigades to bring these truths on the world when nature otherwise does a pretty good job of revealing her truths.

Maybe they aren't true.

Re: Google Grapples with Fallout After Employee Slams Diversity Efforts

#29

Post by adjkant »

canoebuilder wrote: post #28
rpearl wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1. A claim about universality across human cultures. Demonstrably false: http://s3.amazonaws.com/fieldexperiments-papers2/papers/0004... 2. A sweeping variety of claims about the personality differences of coworkers at his own company and why these differences make it okay for him to discriminate. Debunked here: https://www.fastcompany.com/40449759/according-to-employee-p... 3. A claim that there is "a bar" which is…

If all these things were true, shouldn't they be demonstrably obvious to everybody, such that their brightly shining obviousness would handily over power whatever -phobia or -ism du jour you think you are battling. If they were so obviously true why aren't societies' and biologies' natural optimization mechanisms making them unmistakably and obviously true? If it's really the case that women will do equal work for %X…

Just to summarize your post, you ask why it all isn't obvious yet and cite no evidence.

There are plenty of reasons for your questions with answers ranging from historical oppression, lack of early education in STEM for minorities, class differences, and more. Not to mention that not all that is true is obvious. You also seem to be ignoring a lot of people in various communities who are trying to communicate all this, writing them off as having an agenda against yours.

"Well maybe its wrong because it's not how the world is currently" is a terrible argument. Go back in time X years and say this about things the way they were. It's not going to sound good.

Post reply on HN