Google removes its head of diversity after 2007 blog post surfaces • Hacker News Board

Re: Google removes its head of diversity after 2007 blog post surfaces

#371

Post by HelloNurse » Thu, Jun 03, 2021, 3:54 PM UTC

ericd wrote: post #337

howeyc wrote: post #76

Wow, 14 years ago. I hope the current progressive correct-thinkers realize the takes they make today have to hold up over a decade from now, otherwise the next wave is going to cancel them.

One of the most striking things when reading about the French Revolution is seeing some of the original key agitators for Revolution being eventually denounced as insufficiently revolutionary, and some of them even being killed for being considered counter-revolutionary.

In revolutionary France the self-destruction process was fast, less than 10 years. What historical lessons can be applied to the current situation?

Re: Google removes its head of diversity after 2007 blog post surfaces

#372

Post by davemel37 » Thu, Jun 03, 2021, 3:54 PM UTC

Here's the thing I don't get.

If a groups behavior doesn't match your expectations based on your perspective of their history but you dont have the benefit of their lived experiences, wouldn't that be a tell-tale sign to try to recognize you MUST not have an understanding of the topic or enough information to formulate an opinion?

Re: Google removes its head of diversity after 2007 blog post surfaces

#373

Post by teddyh » Thu, Jun 03, 2021, 3:54 PM UTC

BTCOG wrote: post #344

What I find most absurd in all of this is the utter stupidity of beliefs in entirely man made fairytales that have been causing nonstop wars for the past few thousand years. Maybe eventually, Judaism, Christianity, Islam, Mormonism, and any other gullible belief systems in fake sky people, written by total nutcases 1k+ years ago and miraculously still followed today, will end. Believing that you're somehow superior t…

The nazis were not especially religious in nature. And russian communists were specifically anti-religious.

Re: Google removes its head of diversity after 2007 blog post surfaces

#374

Post by kbelder » Thu, Jun 03, 2021, 3:54 PM UTC

austhrow743 wrote: post #338

sanity31415 wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They fired Damore for writing an email that was tone-deaf, insensitive, but largely supported by research Damore was asked for his feedback on Google's diversity policies, and that's exactly what he provided. Most of Damore's critics haven't actually read his memo[1], but rather formed an opinion based on the character assassination campaign against him, a campaign his employer publicly sided with. Over the 4 years…

"Women, on average, have more: Neuroticism" was a big one I remember people having issue with back when this story was news.

Is it false? Doesn't seem like something he would assert without a cite.

Re: Google removes its head of diversity after 2007 blog post surfaces

#375

Post by TeMPOraL » Thu, Jun 03, 2021, 3:55 PM UTC

chewmieser wrote: post #315

frockington1 wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And that is why I stopped calling myself a progressive years ago. In my youth I thought progressive meant trying to continually better yourself and your community. Now the focus seems to be on cancelling any viewpoint that conflicts with yours. The new trend of digging further and further back in the past makes it even more counter to my previous beliefs of the word

I just don't understand this viewpoint as it completely ignores the history of humanity. "Cancel culture" has been used for many centuries to silence dissenters. Take a look at Galieleo as an example. He was excommunicated or "canceled" by religious organizations that held the primary means of power. He was even forced to recant his positions by these groups. How is this any different than today?

Is the cancellation of Galileo by the Church a good example? A way a civilized society should function?

If not, if we consider historical examples like these as failures of past societies, then things "not being any different than today" suggests our society is also failing.

Re: Google removes its head of diversity after 2007 blog post surfaces

#376

Post by vidarh » Thu, Jun 03, 2021, 3:55 PM UTC

londons_explore wrote: post #38

I really wish we could seperate people's private and professional lives. This guy in his private life wrote some nasty blog posts. That shouldn't impact his professional life. Nor vice versa. This blog post isn't sufficiently against the law to end up with him in prison. Yet this is a case of extrajudicial punishment. Unless there is any evidence of him bringing that thinking into his work, he shouldn't be punished.

This guy expressed views that would reasonably call into question whether or not he would do the position he was in. Merely the appearance of such views might make it impossible for him to be able to e.g. get the respect of communities he might have to work with as part of his role.

For many other positions I would agree with you, but not a position like this.

Re: Google removes its head of diversity after 2007 blog post surfaces

#377

Post by balls187 » Thu, Jun 03, 2021, 3:55 PM UTC

rsj_hn wrote: post #329

balls187 wrote: post #298

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the point being made was Damore's email was sent using company resources, while employed by the company, presumably on company time. Bobb's blog post was from 2007.

He was using company resources to respond to a company request for him to provide feedback to a company event. When the company asks you "tell me what you think about the content of our diversity training, we promise your response is confidential and we are interested in hearing what you have to say", and you respond with an evidence based argument that the diversity training is incorrect, then this is a very differe…

I don't have all the facts, but this article [1] seems to refute your accounting.

The memo was initially sent to Diversity Training, then after a non-response, Damore himself circulated to a wider internal audience.

According to Google [2], he was fired because portions of his memo were found to be a violation of Google's Code of Conduct, specifically "each Googler to do their utmost to create a workplace culture that is free of harassment, intimidation, bias and unlawful discrimination."

But again, this all misses the point--a 2007 blog post when you were not an employee is much different than sending a memo internally while on the clock.

1: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/nov/16/james-dam...

2: https://blog.google/outreach-initiatives/diversity/note-empl...

Re: Google removes its head of diversity after 2007 blog post surfaces

#378

Post by artichokes » Thu, Jun 03, 2021, 3:55 PM UTC

cjohnson318 wrote: post #311

whimsicalism wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, people on the Left haven't realized women's innate biological tendency towards neuroticism, which renders affirmative action self-defeating.

> women's innate biological tendency towards neuroticism What the actual... Are you serious right now? Men kill women and other men at much, much higher rates than women kill men or other women. What does that say about the the "innate biological tendencies" of men?

It's universally acknowledged that men are more violent than women.

Re: Google removes its head of diversity after 2007 blog post surfaces

#379

Post by javagram » Thu, Jun 03, 2021, 3:55 PM UTC

antisemtexism wrote: post #322

zpeti wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is the correct answer. The amount of anti-semitism shown during this recent Hamas Israel conflict in the woke left has been very worrying. We are likely to see a big resurgence of anti-semitism in the next period. It's more and more socially acceptable on the left.

Criticism of Israel's apartheid policies isn't antisemitism. It's such nonsense how the two have been conflated in recent years.

Street harassment or violence against visibly Jewish individuals has nothing to do with “criticism of Israel” though, and it did spike and has been increasing based on news articles and counts of reported incidents. https://www.jta.org/2021/05/21/united-states/antisemitism-in...

Re: Google removes its head of diversity after 2007 blog post surfaces

#380

Post by jcranmer » Thu, Jun 03, 2021, 3:55 PM UTC

bushbaba wrote: post #244

literallyWTF wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As I said, Israel conflates being a Jew with the state of Israel. And as such, people associate Israel with Judaism. That’s not offensive if it’s by design. You can’t have your cake and eat it to. Israel is an apartheid state.

Apartheid not by any definition that’s accepted broadly. israel just formed a coalition government with the Arab Israelis.

It would not be entirely far-fetched to compare the status of Arab Israelis with the status of Coloureds in South Africa during late apartheid: Coloureds had some rights (including enfranchisement well before Blacks did), more than Blacks did, but were still pretty systematically discriminated against compared to Whites.

In Israel right now, Arab Israelis have fewer rights than Jewish Israelis do--notably in land rights, where pre-1967 land ownership claims are only legally recognized if you're Jewish, not Arab. That a coalition government has just now been formed with an Arab Israeli party for the first time in Israel's history, largely because it's the only way a coalition could be formed that doesn't include Netanyahu, doesn't invalidate the fact that legal discrimination still exists in Israel, let alone Israel's blatantly illegal actions vis-à-vis Palestine.