My Google Internship • Hacker News Board

Re: My Google Internship

#241

Post by ozy123 » Sat, Dec 03, 2016, 1:29 AM UTC

euyyn wrote: post #233

ozy123 wrote: post #232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your tight leggings create a bulge of your genitalia, societal norms don't yet accommodate the visual enhancing of the penis or vagina such that they are prominently displayed. Unfortunately the penis/scrotum are much more bulgey than the vagina. But by trying to pretend that it's ok for the 'other half' but not you, you're failing to advance your argument - which is that people should get comfortable with your packa…

Not sure what's your point. wsh91 is explaining how much it means to him/her that at Google we're generally happy to personally do those kinds of "accommodations" (for lack of a better word). I couldn't care less about any team-mate of mine coming dressed the way they wanted. And I'm not surrounded by "every minority group", so if someone told me tomorrow he rather I use "he"/"she"/whatever when referring to them in…

Him/her/them/per/xem/...

https://uwm.edu/lgbtrc/support/gender-pronouns/

Do try to be inclusive when making a point about how happy you are to be inclusive.

Re: My Google Internship

#242

Post by edblarney » Sat, Dec 03, 2016, 2:21 AM UTC

hota_mazi wrote: post #225

edblarney wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One one side: yes. And BTW - this has nothing to do with defense industry, it's just 99% of business is like this. Business could do a lot more to make a more fun environment. On the other hand ... Google is a 'de-facto' monopoly, and they print money. They are super, super rich, and literally have billions more than they know what to do with. So it's easy to justify a lot of extra expenses. And these things can be e…

> 'Free lunch' was a cold, hard, Google style calculation: the time it took to 'drive to resto and back' was wasted time, it was cheaper to give people food than have them waste this time. No, it's not. If it was, all companies would do it. And they would probably just give away sandwiches and call it a day instead of setting up dozens of gourmet cafeterias with different themes and chefs at the helm throughout their…

"No, it's not. If it was, all companies would do it."

No, this is false.

Google employees productivity, as measured in earnings/capita, is significantly greater than most other companies.

Google does not 'lose money' on the policy, if it was a 'net loser', they would end it.

It's effectively part of the total incentive package.

If it costs them $20/day per person, that's an extra $4K/year per person, if it increases productivity by only 2% it's an obvious winner based on that easy calculation alone.

Google has billions of dollars they don't know what to do with, and their effective cost of capital is very low. Anything they can do to materially lift output - that doesn't cost zillions - is probably worth it.

Re: My Google Internship

#243

Post by edblarney » Sat, Dec 03, 2016, 2:25 AM UTC

euyyn wrote: post #236

edblarney wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One one side: yes. And BTW - this has nothing to do with defense industry, it's just 99% of business is like this. Business could do a lot more to make a more fun environment. On the other hand ... Google is a 'de-facto' monopoly, and they print money. They are super, super rich, and literally have billions more than they know what to do with. So it's easy to justify a lot of extra expenses. And these things can be e…

> Google is a 'de-facto' monopoly, and they print money. They are super, super rich, and literally have billions more than they know what to do with. > So it's easy to justify a lot of extra expenses I see how it can look like that from outside, but from within Google is pretty serious about expenses and costs. All the perks and benefits are an investment to acquire and retain the employees, and to allow them to be a…

" Google is pretty serious about expenses and costs"

Which validates my point: the value of the 'free food' is a calculation. It's based on employee productivity gains, retainment etc.. If it wasn't an economic value-add, it would be canned.

"Google stock doesn't give dividends: all profits are reinvested in the projects"

Sorry to be picky but this statement is not true at all.

1) It does not matter whether a company pays dividends, or a company retains the earnings for shareholders. Economically - they are equivalent. In practice, companies get valued a little bit differently ... but financially they are equal.

2) A company that 'reinvests all profits in projects' is called a 'non profit' - and would mean a share price of $0. :) :) :)

Re: My Google Internship

#244

Post by wsh91 » Sat, Dec 03, 2016, 2:32 AM UTC

euyyn wrote: post #233

ozy123 wrote: post #232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your tight leggings create a bulge of your genitalia, societal norms don't yet accommodate the visual enhancing of the penis or vagina such that they are prominently displayed. Unfortunately the penis/scrotum are much more bulgey than the vagina. But by trying to pretend that it's ok for the 'other half' but not you, you're failing to advance your argument - which is that people should get comfortable with your packa…

Not sure what's your point. wsh91 is explaining how much it means to him/her that at Google we're generally happy to personally do those kinds of "accommodations" (for lack of a better word). I couldn't care less about any team-mate of mine coming dressed the way they wanted. And I'm not surrounded by "every minority group", so if someone told me tomorrow he rather I use "he"/"she"/whatever when referring to them in…

Thanks for giving a shit. :) (I go by "they".) And I promise that for those of us who are a little different, the effort is what matters.

Re: My Google Internship

#245

Post by wsh91 » Sat, Dec 03, 2016, 2:34 AM UTC

ozy123 wrote: post #232

wsh91 wrote: post #231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It means that software (the product, not the community) tends to offer a binary choice for gender and a lack of gender-neutral forms of address (I go by Mx.). It means that the conversations around gender in tech tend to reflexively focus on "women" with "men" as their opposite, both essentializing gender and reinforcing a fictional dichotomy. It means being able to come to work dressed the way I want to dress withou…

Your tight leggings create a bulge of your genitalia, societal norms don't yet accommodate the visual enhancing of the penis or vagina such that they are prominently displayed. Unfortunately the penis/scrotum are much more bulgey than the vagina. But by trying to pretend that it's ok for the 'other half' but not you, you're failing to advance your argument - which is that people should get comfortable with your packa…

I guess for me the question would be "why are you trying to scrutinize my genitalia?" Google is famous for its dress code: "you must wear something." Seems to work out okay for us.

Re: My Google Internship

#246

Post by edblarney » Sat, Dec 03, 2016, 2:39 AM UTC

tptacek wrote: post #228

edblarney wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"gender doesn't seem to be the strongest predictor of bathroom hygiene" It definitely is when you have very few elements to chose from. When the 'men's' one-ey is 'in use' in Starbucks, I often go into the 'women's' - and it's very consistently cleaner. It is what it is.

So you're saying we should have binary signed toilets so that you can ignore the signs ?

For one-sies - yes, so long as the other is occupied and there is a real need.

You see, it's called 'being practical' - not 'ideological'.

Nobody but crazy SJW's and a small minority of a small minority (i.e. those who are not gender binary, and who also have issues with bathroom signage) cares about this issue.

Re: My Google Internship

#247

Post by edblarney » Sat, Dec 03, 2016, 2:46 AM UTC

wglb wrote: post #208

edblarney wrote: post #167

"It’s Googley to stand up for diversity and inclusion, such as protesting against binary gendering on toilets" This is BS. 99.99% of the world is find with the 'binary signage' on toilets, and it is absolutely not 'anti trans' or 'anti anyone else' frankly, to do so. BTW - this is not like a 1960's movement - you're not in the 'right side of history' here. 'Binary Gender' is, and will always be normative, simply beca…

So if 'Binary Gender' is, and will always be normative, simply because almost everyone is binary , I wonder what it might be like to be left-handed. Would you consider it social extremism to treat left-handers, which are a seriously small minority (10%) as actually equal to right-handed, normative, normal folks?

10% is a meaningful minority.

As it stands, the world is mostly made for right-handed people, with a lot of accommodation for lefties.

In very lose terms, the number of people who identify as 'somewhere on the spectrum of gender' is about 0.5% - but this includes a huge amount of people who have a 'feeling' and frankly, are probably ideological about it, i.e. "I don't believe in gender, ergo, I refuse to identify as one".

The actual number of people who truly do not fit in essentially or pragmatically one or the other gender - to the point wherein they would feel uncomfortable going into either a male or female bathroom is extremely small. Remember that even most trans people actually identify with one gender or the other.

So, when > 99.9% of a population 'is something' ... 'it's normative'.

Re: My Google Internship

#248

Post by ozy123 » Sat, Dec 03, 2016, 3:39 AM UTC

wsh91 wrote: post #245

ozy123 wrote: post #232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your tight leggings create a bulge of your genitalia, societal norms don't yet accommodate the visual enhancing of the penis or vagina such that they are prominently displayed. Unfortunately the penis/scrotum are much more bulgey than the vagina. But by trying to pretend that it's ok for the 'other half' but not you, you're failing to advance your argument - which is that people should get comfortable with your packa…

I guess for me the question would be "why are you trying to scrutinize my genitalia?" Google is famous for its dress code: "you must wear something." Seems to work out okay for us.

But see that betrays the hypocrisy in the request. Tight fitting clothing highlights the sexual organ. The absence of clothing does the same thing (and yes in the minds of others). Why you are comfortable with google's insistence of clothing but uncomfortable with the request of others to not wear something that has a similar effect?

So whether I'm interested in your genitalia or not is beside the point. You were trying to draw a false equivalence, I wanted you to understand why it was different for you and not 'half of the office'.

Re: My Google Internship

#249

Post by tptacek » Sat, Dec 03, 2016, 3:40 AM UTC

edblarney wrote: post #246

tptacek wrote: post #228

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So you're saying we should have binary signed toilets so that you can ignore the signs ?

For one-sies - yes, so long as the other is occupied and there is a real need. You see, it's called 'being practical' - not 'ideological'. Nobody but crazy SJW's and a small minority of a small minority (i.e. those who are not gender binary, and who also have issues with bathroom signage) cares about this issue.

Well I can't speak for anyone else but I'm convinced.

Re: My Google Internship

#250

Post by wsh91 » Sat, Dec 03, 2016, 4:34 AM UTC

ozy123 wrote: post #248

wsh91 wrote: post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guess for me the question would be "why are you trying to scrutinize my genitalia?" Google is famous for its dress code: "you must wear something." Seems to work out okay for us.

But see that betrays the hypocrisy in the request. Tight fitting clothing highlights the sexual organ. The absence of clothing does the same thing (and yes in the minds of others). Why you are comfortable with google's insistence of clothing but uncomfortable with the request of others to not wear something that has a similar effect? So whether I'm interested in your genitalia or not is beside the point. You were try…

I don't think anything I say will convince you that I merit being accorded with dignity, so I'll leave it at this: you're welcome to apply and come try to convince us otherwise! You know where to find us. I recommend Cracking the Coding Interview and lots of whiteboard practice. :)