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

About This Googler's Manifesto

medium.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 404 posts

Re: About This Googler's Manifesto

#201

Post by muninn_ »

pacala wrote: post #199

> And as for its impact on you: Do you understand that at this point, I could not in good conscience assign anyone to work with you? I certainly couldn’t assign any women to deal with this, a good number of the people you might have to work with may simply punch you in the face, and even if there were a group of like-minded individuals I could put you with, nobody would be able to collaborate with them. You have just…

Tell me about it. Reading that made me sick. I don't necessarily agree with the original manifesto, but the idea that "a good number of the people you might have to work with may simply punch you in the face" is an acceptable thing to say is ridiculous.

If this "manifesto" was actually racist and bigoted, it still doesn't excuse violence, or the suggestion of violence. That is FAR worse. It's un-American. We tolerate groups like the KKK or Black Panthers or Westboro Baptist because even if they are vehemently WRONG, they have a right to speak freely.

Not to mention, one person published what they thought at risk of being ostracized by their community and workplace. The other person doesn't work at Google, has 0 real risk, and is just taking the status quo stance and presenting a holier-than-thou approach.

This is all you need to see: "Either political analysis of authoritarian regimes, or interesting facts about science, depending on my mood."

What this means is:

Wahhhh Trump! I'm pretty moody and better than you, so I'll only discuss something if I can look good doing it or I can impress everybody.

Re: About This Googler's Manifesto

#202

Post by muninn_ »

irl_zebra wrote: post #200
pacala wrote: post #199

> And as for its impact on you: Do you understand that at this point, I could not in good conscience assign anyone to work with you? I certainly couldn’t assign any women to deal with this, a good number of the people you might have to work with may simply punch you in the face, and even if there were a group of like-minded individuals I could put you with, nobody would be able to collaborate with them. You have just…

I believe he's talking about punishing the overt act of publishing this large manifesto and the negative consequences that flow from it. Not the thinking or discussing his views.

Shouldn't even be talking about it. It's simply not an option. Violence is not acceptable. Period. Discussing it as a repercussion for a possibly misguided manifesto is not an option. It's disgusting.

Re: About This Googler's Manifesto

#203

Post by mcphage »

tibiapejagala wrote: post #144

I might partially or totally disagree with the original manifest, but this reply is repulsive. I would never want to have a "senior" like this. So much emphasis on how senior he is, how junior you have to write something so wrong. How OP's career is over. The 3rd point reads like navy seals copypasta but with HR instead. If you don't see any other way to deal with OP's views than described in this belittling rant, th…

> >Essentially, engineering is all about cooperation, collaboration, and empathy for both your colleagues and your customers.

> Replace 'engineering' with science, medicine, finance, customer service, politics, retail, programming etc., and it will sound as correct.

Why, so it would! How about that. It's like watching a lightbulb is slowly turning on above your head.

Re: About This Googler's Manifesto

#204

Post by mcphage »

pacala wrote: post #199

> And as for its impact on you: Do you understand that at this point, I could not in good conscience assign anyone to work with you? I certainly couldn’t assign any women to deal with this, a good number of the people you might have to work with may simply punch you in the face, and even if there were a group of like-minded individuals I could put you with, nobody would be able to collaborate with them. You have just…

> The heretic must be isolated and extirpated, with physical violence for good measure.

More like "the [heretic] has burned any social capital or respect their coworkers might have had for them, and so no longer are capable of working in a collaborative environment with their peers"

Re: About This Googler's Manifesto

#205

Post by mcphage »

muninn_ wrote: post #202
irl_zebra wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I believe he's talking about punishing the overt act of publishing this large manifesto and the negative consequences that flow from it. Not the thinking or discussing his views.

Shouldn't even be talking about it. It's simply not an option. Violence is not acceptable. Period. Discussing it as a repercussion for a possibly misguided manifesto is not an option. It's disgusting.

Meh, some people respond to insults with violence. It's not great, but the idea that attacking people verbally is somehow "better" than attacking them physically is wrong.

Re: About This Googler's Manifesto

#206

Post by mcphage »

MichaelGG wrote: post #121
api wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One of the demons hiding in this issue is the is/ought fallacy. People go from is to ought quite readily in these areas. Let's say blacks really are on average better at basketball. Does it then follow that whites and asians ought not play basketball ? Nobody argues that because it's silly. (Or do they? I'm not in pro ball.) People do argue that women should not be in tech. Women in tech regardless of ability get cre…

The original doc doesn't argue women shouldn't be in tech, so it is irrelevant what some people suggest. It argues a 50/50 parity might not exist in part due to biology. What if it turns out that one gender is on avg smarter but with less range of intelligence (with some magically perfect measurement of intelligence, to avoid claims of test bias). So if that was true, would we THEN be OK with other than 50/50 split i…

> All that Google would have to do is admit 50/50 isn't based on anything hard, and commit to finding out what the real number should be.

It is based on something hard—the gender distribution in the population.

Re: About This Googler's Manifesto

#207

Post by scarmig »

mcphage wrote: post #205
muninn_ wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Shouldn't even be talking about it. It's simply not an option. Violence is not acceptable. Period. Discussing it as a repercussion for a possibly misguided manifesto is not an option. It's disgusting.

Meh, some people respond to insults with violence. It's not great, but the idea that attacking people verbally is somehow "better" than attacking them physically is wrong.

Are you seriously stating that insulting/offending people is equal in moral gravity to punching them?

I read the manifesto and thought it was stupid in most of its claims. But it's not hard to feel like thoughtcrime has become a real thing nowadays.

Re: About This Googler's Manifesto

#208

Post by atom-morgan »

minwcnt5 wrote: post #126
TheCoreh wrote: post #82

I'd seriously like to know if the author meant this literally: > a good number of the people you might have to work with may simply punch you in the face If that's indeed the case, isn't that on itself a huge problem we should deal with? If someone is risking being a victim of physical violence on the workplace over disagreements on political positions we should be seriously concerned.

Oh come on, it's obvious hyperbole. I wouldn't actually punch this guy in the face if I had to work with him, but I would certainly would silently wish I could.

Considering how often words are labeled violence today, it's bizarre that words about actual violence is hyperbole.

Re: About This Googler's Manifesto

#209

Post by masterleep »

mcphage wrote: post #205
muninn_ wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Shouldn't even be talking about it. It's simply not an option. Violence is not acceptable. Period. Discussing it as a repercussion for a possibly misguided manifesto is not an option. It's disgusting.

Meh, some people respond to insults with violence. It's not great, but the idea that attacking people verbally is somehow "better" than attacking them physically is wrong.

One is a crime and the other isn't. That's for a good reason.

Re: About This Googler's Manifesto

#210

Post by atom-morgan »

DenisM wrote: post #113
to_bpr wrote: post #19

Is there any other professional industry as politically divided and toxic as tech has become? Is there any other industry in which private companies shove their "values" down the throats of their employees in the manner we experience in tech?

Academia. Not an industry, but still a field of professional activity.

And Susan Fowler said academia is more sexist than tech. Which one is more liberal? https://twitter.com/susanthesquark/status/880949030900989953...)
Post reply on HN