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

371–380 of 404 posts

Re: About This Googler's Manifesto

#371

Post by Goladus »

stephenboyd wrote: post #304
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…

That's not punishment, it's problem-solving. It's about protecting the company, not what the manifesto author deserves. Yonatan Zunger didn't promote any kind of retribution or vengeance for writing the manifesto, just that they would have to stop the employee from further degrading the workplace environment with the most reliably effective response, termination.

Anyone who thinks the Google author's piece represents degradation of the workplace environment needs to put up a valid non-circular argument for why that is the case.

No one has. And no one will, because the piece is very polite, sincere, well-written, and reasonable.

Anyone can claim their feelings are hurt by someone speaking the truth as they see it. That doesn't mean you get to use that claim (true or not) to impose your will forcefully on others any time you want to.

Re: About This Googler's Manifesto

#372

Post by Malice »

asciicircum wrote: post #363
smb06 wrote: post #360

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually, what I was trying to say was that the document cannot be simultaneously non offensive and yet offend everyone reading it unless "everyone is stupid = has bad reading comprehension" I don't think everyone has bad reading comprehension, tbh. It is what parts of the document that you focus on - the ones that align with your existing world view - that cause you to agree with it or get offended by it. Some see i…

> Some see it as "just sharing an opinion" and others see it as "questioning my capability of doing the tech job" Could you point me to a quote taken in context that does that? I just reread the document and fail to see where the manifesto questions an individuals capacity of doing a tech job. I'm honestly trying but fail to see the offense. AFAIK the author questions whether the percentage of capable and willing ind…

> Could you point me to a quote taken in context that does that? I just reread the document and fail to see where the manifesto questions an individuals capacity of doing a tech job. I'm honestly trying but fail to see the offense.

I'd second this. I've read it a few times and can't see the problem. To be explicit, I'm not saying there is no problem, I'm asking for help to see it.

Re: About This Googler's Manifesto

#373

Post by pacala »

unityByFreedom wrote: post #367
pacala wrote: post #311

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> [...] raise into question the fundamental capability of every woman you work with [...] Can you please substantiate? Link to the "manifesto", https://gizmodo.com/exclusive-heres-the-full-10-page-anti-di...

Does this really need explaining? He lists certain traits he thinks are distinct to men and women. Clearly, "ability to handle stress" is important for every job. Measuring someone's stress and perceiving your own stress are highly subjective, as is the definition of success. The manifesto author acts like these things are all objectively observable, but they're not. If you want a data-based analysis on which we can…

> ability to handle stress gender difference

https://www.google.com/search?q=ability+to+handle+stress+gen...

First result:

http://www.apa.org/news/press/releases/stress/2010/gender-st...

First paragraph:

> Men and women* report different reactions to stress, both physically and mentally. They attempt to manage stress in very different ways and also perceive their ability to do so — and the things that stand in their way — in markedly different ways. Findings suggest that while women are more likely to report physical symptoms associated with stress, they are doing a better job connecting with others in their lives and, at times, these connections are important to their stress management strategies.

Note that the Gizmodo publication removed data and references from the text, https://gizmodo.com/exclusive-heres-the-full-10-page-anti-di...

> The text of the post is reproduced in full below, with some minor formatting modifications. Two charts and several hyperlinks are also omitted.

Disclaimer: I have no idea how this facet affects one's capacity of performing in a tech role, if at all.

Re: About This Googler's Manifesto

#374

Post by Malice »

nopatternhere wrote: post #179
MichaelGG wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's no different than a guy in the NBA wondering out loud if the bias towards men might have a biological component, so that even if the systemic barriers are removed, we might expect far different than 50/50 female/male in the NBA. But no one thinks that - it's obviously silly because physical attributes are so obvious. So we'll use Wikipedia as a perfect summary of all the research on this topic: https://en.wikipe…

I hate the high end examples, because people want to argue them. The case is also true the other way - there are more men at the bottom of the IQ scale. Can someone come up with a reason why an IQ test would make men appear more often in the bottom of IQ distributions?

Because of "significantly higher variance in male scores"

Re: About This Googler's Manifesto

#375

Post by [deleted] »

chippy wrote: post #194
api wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are correct that the doc does not argue this. I'm arguing that the doc's author fails to understand the purpose of diversity measures. They are not to make people equal but to challenge culture. Only CRISPR/CAS9 or similar could actually alter biologically based inequality. That being said I'm very skeptical of an innate gender disadvantage in coding. Some of the earliest coders were women back when it was consid…

I think out of all the comments in this thread, this, so far, is the one that speaks differently. Diversity in Tech is indeed about changing the culture. That should be the central reply to this manifesto. Both the manifesto and the negative responses to it are missing this central point - they are focusing it as being about employment hiring about aptitude and worthiness of the job. It's why a call for meritocracy i…

[deleted]

Re: About This Googler's Manifesto

#376

Post by totemizer »

heurist wrote: post #112
totemizer wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

as i wrote it elsewhere already regarding the original "manifesto": i am curious, if this person is ok with questioning their belief in "traits" that are defined on the level of sex. after all they are the one who says that "some ideas are too sacred to be discussed" and when i bring this up, i often find that the "differences" between the sexes are exactly one of these ideas. the reactions to this talk are a good ex…

Are you okay with people questioning your questioning of gender differences? Obviously there are differences. It is frustrating to continually have to explain how irrelevant they are to performance in 99.9% of business functions. 1. The cohesiveness of the organization is more important than any particular individual. 2. Men have greater variance in many skills than women do, so there are more men on the high end and…

I am ok with people questioning anything, the only situation when this is not ok when there is an emergency, and for those situation we should be prepared ahead, so there is no question what we have to do. I see that you agree that the differences are irrelevant. Or how I would say, the effect size is too small to be considered as a factor.

1. however any organization should have a purpose beyond sustaining itself and if it has no such, it should be dismantled immediatelly

2. probably true, but it's definitely more about the circumstances than about the individuals

3. agreed

4. this is as much about diagnosing behaviors as about expressing the said behaviors. my views of how minds work significantly differ from the views that use these diagnoses

5. i don't believe in "talented individuals". rest of this point is fine by me.

6. this whole thing is nonsense to me. sure, what you say is true, but as I said I don't believe in talent. I also don't believe that you need to be competitive to be productive. I don't think a team or an individual has to be competitive in any situation besides competitions, and those are actually quite rare. obviously, if someone believes they are competing when they are not or should not, that can be extremely destructive.

7. the grass is green, the sky is blue, and truisms are truisms. :)

8. sure, but to be empathetic is to express empathy when it's appropriate, which can be learned. some people learn it fast other's maybe never. but most often the reason for this is not because they were born like that, but because the circumstances didn't allow them to learn it.

9. diversity is good in ecosystems because it gives resilience. that's true again, in almost any sufficiently complex situation

10. depends what you mean by "balance" & "in the end". certainly i don't see it being nowhere balanced currently, i know lots of people who are forced into roles based on their gender (sometimes even by their sex) that they can not fulfill and it's just bad for everyone involved.

I don't think we are different enough for us to talk about it how different we are and definitely we are not different enough so we have the society built around these differences as it is right now. Maybe not where you live, and if you are lucky like that, be glad for it. Where I live, women are oppressed actively. They have to spend way more time to be accepted by their peers than men, they have to work way more than men to be accepted as productive. They have less chances to have say in important decisions. etc.

Re: About This Googler's Manifesto

#377

Post by unityByFreedom »

pacala wrote: post #373
unityByFreedom wrote: post #367

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does this really need explaining? He lists certain traits he thinks are distinct to men and women. Clearly, "ability to handle stress" is important for every job. Measuring someone's stress and perceiving your own stress are highly subjective, as is the definition of success. The manifesto author acts like these things are all objectively observable, but they're not. If you want a data-based analysis on which we can…

> ability to handle stress gender difference https://www.google.com/search?q=ability+to+handle+stress+gen... First result: http://www.apa.org/news/press/releases/stress/2010/gender-st... First paragraph: > Men and women* report different reactions to stress, both physically and mentally. They attempt to manage stress in very different ways and also perceive their ability to do so — and the things that stand in their…

I'm not sure what you're rebutting. The APA page doesn't support any claim that men or women are better at handling stress. It just says they handle it differently.

> Disclaimer: I have no idea how this facet affects one's capacity of performing in a tech role.

Yeah. On the other hand, the manifesto author suggests that "stress tolerance" is gender based, and may affect your capacity to succeed in tech: "differences may explain why we don't see equal representation of women in tech"

It seems clear to me that the manifesto author "raises into question the fundamental capability of every woman he works with".

Re: About This Googler's Manifesto

#378

Post by throwaway12124 »

mcphage wrote: post #204
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"

I've worked successfully with a number of people whose opinions on many subjects were radically different than my own. It's called being a professional.

Re: About This Googler's Manifesto

#379

Post by sagichmal »

Goladus wrote: post #371
stephenboyd wrote: post #304

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not punishment, it's problem-solving. It's about protecting the company, not what the manifesto author deserves. Yonatan Zunger didn't promote any kind of retribution or vengeance for writing the manifesto, just that they would have to stop the employee from further degrading the workplace environment with the most reliably effective response, termination.

Anyone who thinks the Google author's piece represents degradation of the workplace environment needs to put up a valid non-circular argument for why that is the case. No one has. And no one will, because the piece is very polite, sincere, well-written, and reasonable. Anyone can claim their feelings are hurt by someone speaking the truth as they see it. That doesn't mean you get to use that claim (true or not) to im…

Effectively every public rebuttal to the piece has painstakingly demonstrated in great detail how and why it actively and maliciously "degrades the workplace environment." To claim that nobody has successfully done so is disingenuous in the extreme.

Re: About This Googler's Manifesto

#380

Post by Goladus »

sagichmal wrote: post #379
Goladus wrote: post #371

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Anyone who thinks the Google author's piece represents degradation of the workplace environment needs to put up a valid non-circular argument for why that is the case. No one has. And no one will, because the piece is very polite, sincere, well-written, and reasonable. Anyone can claim their feelings are hurt by someone speaking the truth as they see it. That doesn't mean you get to use that claim (true or not) to im…

Effectively every public rebuttal to the piece has painstakingly demonstrated in great detail how and why it actively and maliciously "degrades the workplace environment." To claim that nobody has successfully done so is disingenuous in the extreme.

Link me one.
Post reply on HN