James Damore and three others end Google suit • Hacker News Board

Re: James Damore and three others end Google suit

#371

Post by leetcrew » Sat, May 09, 2020, 2:28 PM UTC

mabbo wrote: post #184

Damore committed the ultimate sin in the corporate world- he caused a huge PR mess. Let's set aside the content of his memo (I personally don't agree with what he said) and just appreciate that he made a mess. As has been said before, if your CEO learns your name for the same reason he has to end his vacation early, you probably should start polishing up your resume.

I'm inclined to agree; it's never a good idea to discuss stuff like this on work comms. this leads to a bigger question though. why does google encourage this kind of discussion on an internal mailing list in the first place? seems like it can only lead to embarrassing PR moments.

Re: James Damore and three others end Google suit

#372

Post by Udik » Sat, May 09, 2020, 2:28 PM UTC

implements wrote: post #162

hckr_news wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He also tweeted during the middle of this, "The KKK is horrible and I don't support them in any way, but can we admit that their internal title names are cool, e.g. 'Grand Wizard'?" So... shrugs

He sounds like he may be on the autistic spectrum, which if treated as a form of social disability would (or should, IMO) grant him some leeway. If his intent wasn’t sexist then his failure to perfectly negotiate the complex social way those points have to be expressed isn’t a moral failing on his part. Edit: I’d rather posters took the time to argue against rather than downvote. My point is just that ‘socially colou…

> He sounds like he may be on the autistic spectrum, which if treated as a form of social disability would (or should, IMO) grant him some leeway.

This attitude leaves me almost speechless. When someone makes an argument that at least tries to be well reasoned, and people attack him based on misunderstandings and how it makes them feel, maybe the problem is not that he's autistic. Maybe it's those who are offended and refuse to engage in a civilized debate that have some form of disability.

It used to be that dispassionate reason was the highest form of discourse (the only one on which it's possible to reach agreements). What happened to that standard, when the responses boil down to "how does it make you feel"?

Re: James Damore and three others end Google suit

#373

Post by bobmcbobface » Sat, May 09, 2020, 2:28 PM UTC

THERE'S A HUGE SHORTAGE OF MEN IN NURSING! THIS IS OBVIOUSLY DUE TO INHERENT SEXISM AND FEMALE TOXICITY! HOW DO WE SOLVE THIS ISSUE?

Re: James Damore and three others end Google suit

#374

Post by lonelappde » Sat, May 09, 2020, 2:29 PM UTC

sacks2k wrote: post #292

mabbo wrote: post #184

Damore committed the ultimate sin in the corporate world- he caused a huge PR mess. Let's set aside the content of his memo (I personally don't agree with what he said) and just appreciate that he made a mess. As has been said before, if your CEO learns your name for the same reason he has to end his vacation early, you probably should start polishing up your resume.

He never released anything to the public. Someone who didn't like his political views leaked it to Twitter and the press. If I were him, I would have personally sued the person that leaked the content and continued the fight until they had no money left. They really need to be taught a lesson that it's not okay to do something like this with the intention of destroying a person's life.

Damore was character assassinated via leaks and libel, yes. Pragmatically, he could have prevented his fate if he took the opportunity to back down when challenged by corporate, instead of defending his right to free honest speech at a megacorp. He erroneously thought that because controversial party-line free-speech was job-safe even when intellectually dishonest, that controversial anti-party-line free speech was also job-safe.

Re: James Damore and three others end Google suit

#375

Post by spangry » Sat, May 09, 2020, 2:29 PM UTC

foldr wrote: post #353

spangry wrote: post #317

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> but they're particularly off putting to women. This is the crux of the issue. For this to be true, it must also be true that men and women are, at least in some ways, intrinsically different (otherwise why would these things pose a greater challenge for women relative to men)?

Contrary to a popular straw man, few people deny that men and women are different in some respects. The point is that there is no reason to think that these differences should, in a healthy culture, put women off becoming programmers, or make them less capable of doing a good job.

Sure, and that's not an argument I'd make. But, as Damore suggested in his memo, mightn't these innate differences mean that women are less likely, on average, to prefer careers in software engineering? And mightn't these innate differences also explain why women are strongly over-represented in certain other professions like nursing (91%), elementary and middle school teaching (81%) and social work (80%)?

Re: James Damore and three others end Google suit

#376

Post by pgcj_poster » Sat, May 09, 2020, 2:29 PM UTC

DonHopkins wrote: post #297

mabbo wrote: post #184

Damore committed the ultimate sin in the corporate world- he caused a huge PR mess. Let's set aside the content of his memo (I personally don't agree with what he said) and just appreciate that he made a mess. As has been said before, if your CEO learns your name for the same reason he has to end his vacation early, you probably should start polishing up your resume.

If your CEO hires women who you think are biologically inferior to you because of their gender, you'd better start polishing up your resume before they learn your name.

Most people who think that women are inferior (just on average tho!) remain gainfully employed, because instead of writing their views on internal company memos, they post them on news.ycombinator.com.

Re: James Damore and three others end Google suit

#377

Post by JMTQp8lwXL » Sat, May 09, 2020, 2:30 PM UTC

gameswithgo wrote: post #174

Google has fired a few people, liberal and conservative, for being politically insufferable. Multiple people in the news about this on various places in political spectrum. It doesn’t mean they were wrong.

Who are the high-profile liberals that got fired from Google; I can't think of any, but the only person I can recall Google firing for political views is Damore. I wouldn't be surprised if they had filed any liberals; but they certainly didn't get equivalent media coverage as Damore.

Re: James Damore and three others end Google suit

#378

Post by lonelappde » Sat, May 09, 2020, 2:32 PM UTC

rbanffy wrote: post #324

threatofrain wrote: post #315

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s like suing people for telling others that you’re gay. That’s a standard of liability people would never rally behind, one which prevents you from speaking truthfully at the cost of another person.

Not quite. He didn't write the memo to say he's a misogynist or a political conservative. He wrote a memo implying the women who worked with him may not be as competent as the men. Now replace "women" with any other group, such as people of color, Jews, armed forces veterans or Republicans, and see how it goes.

You shouldn't make extreme claims about what other people supposedly said without showing evidence.

Re: James Damore and three others end Google suit

#379

Post by humanrebar » Sat, May 09, 2020, 2:34 PM UTC

StephenAmar wrote: post #319

pjc50 wrote: post #311

Earlier quoted context omitted.

.. so you'd destroy their life instead?

Always assume that what you say could be on the front page of the New York Times.

I'll point out that this aphorism concedes that certain categories of interesting discussion are not possible, and it's a little neutral about that prospect for my taste.

It also concedes that "The New York Times" cannot be trusted to value that kind of discourse more than gotcha narrative chasing.

Re: James Damore and three others end Google suit

#380

Post by JMTQp8lwXL » Sat, May 09, 2020, 2:36 PM UTC

dhhwrongagain wrote: post #237

somewhereoutth wrote: post #226

I am shocked that there is even a discussion to be had on this. In architecture (a somewhat older profession, but also concerning things constructed by people), women previously did have a hard time, and often had to practice under their husbands/partners name. Mercifully this ended some while ago, and now architecture schools and onwards are more evenly gender balanced. Nobody suggests that women are somehow natural…

Damore never claimed women were intrinsically less inclined to engineering. He cited the big five personality trait model as evidence for why engineering culture is not welcoming to women.

Personality traits that are intrinsic, thus suggesting women are intrinsically less inclined to engineering. (Note: I don't agree with the thesis, but that's the implication).