Ask a Female Engineer: Thoughts on the Google Memo • Hacker News Board

Re: Ask a Female Engineer: Thoughts on the Google Memo

#431

Post by token92375 » Tue, Aug 15, 2017, 9:36 PM UTC

dguaraglia wrote: post #246

mastazi wrote: post #185

So the takeaway is: you should become extremely proficient at writing memos and back them up with vast amounts of research, or be fired. But all of the above applies only if your memo expresses conservative ideas. I don't consider myself a conservative but I find all of this disturbing.

Maybe the takeaway is: you shouldn't write "memos" that generate a lot of noise and lost productivity in your work environment and affect your company's external image. If you have political points you want to make, go find a group of like-minded individuals and discuss with them first.

Brendan Eich was voluntarily stepped down for doing something outside of work.

Re: Ask a Female Engineer: Thoughts on the Google Memo

#432

Post by dwaltrip » Tue, Aug 15, 2017, 9:36 PM UTC

arcticfox wrote: post #386

jake-low wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is addressed in TFA. > [W]hen I go to work, I go to work, and not to a debate club. Some people at Google reacted by saying “well if he’s so wrong, then why not refute him,” but that requires spending a significant amount of time building an argument against the claims in his document. On the other hand, if I remain silent, that silence could be mistaken for agreement. I should not be forced into that kind of de…

It seems like you're holding a significant double standard here, which is exactly why Damore feels his views are systemically quashed. For example, that line of reasoning would go: Damore saw practices he feels are discriminatory based on the available evidence. His silence could be mistaken for agreement. He should not be forced into that kind of debate at work.

Ideally, the one whose views are the least congruent with reality in a harmful way should feel more pressure and less freedom to express their opinion (because people won't be interested in hearing nonsense).

Finding the approaches and views that are most coherently grounded in reality is obviously a continuously difficult task.

We shouldn't treat people poorly just for being wrong, unless their expressions of views is actively harmful. Making that determination can also be very difficult.

Lastly, as a slight tangent, no human knowledge is or ever will be 100% certain and robust (although in some specific domains we can attain incredibly high confidence). We should keep this uncertainty in mind when we act.

Re: Ask a Female Engineer: Thoughts on the Google Memo

#433

Post by jshevek » Tue, Aug 15, 2017, 9:36 PM UTC

Delmania wrote: post #90

bufbupa wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you arguing we should spare factual discourse for the sake of someones subjective feelings?

Why don't you go ahead and read this: http://sethgodin.typepad.com/seths_blog/2017/08/sloppy-scien... Simply put, unless you are mindful of someone's "subjective feelings" you will never be able to have a "factual discourse" with them. People are individuals and not statistics. You can quote statistics and average all day long, but if you offend, anger, or harm someone with your words, that person will not listen to…

The situation is more dire than that link suggests.

It isn't just that some people are too emotionally reactive to be directly involved in a reasonable conversation.

We are currently shutting down even the possibility of a conversation among any set of a large group of people, because some people in that group are uncomfortable with it.

They aren't even willing to sit out the conversation that makes them uncomfortable, they are insisting that nobody else be allowed to have the conversation within the larger community.

Re: Ask a Female Engineer: Thoughts on the Google Memo

#434

Post by dandare » Tue, Aug 15, 2017, 9:36 PM UTC

tiles wrote: post #99

alpsgolden wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When I walk into my job at a tech company, how do I know which of my colleagues thinks I’m an outlier among women versus someone who was hired because I’m female that doesn’t deserve the job they have? Isn't this an argument against any form of different hiring practices based on race/gender? Even if distributions of abilities are equal in nature, if a college has a lower bar based on gender, then abilities won't be…

Google's stance, as stated in the article, is that they divert more energy in to finding minority candidates. That's not the same as a lower bar. Abilities are expected to be distributed equally still.

This argument reminds me of the "waterboarding is not torture" argument, both suffer from slothful induction fallacy.

If waterboarding is not torture then why would you apply it to detainees to confess information they otherwise wouldn't?

Equally, if diverting more energy in to finding minority candidates is not lowering the bar for them then why would you need to divert more energy to find them?

Re: Ask a Female Engineer: Thoughts on the Google Memo

#435

Post by humanrebar » Tue, Aug 15, 2017, 9:37 PM UTC

interlocutor wrote: post #348

rllin wrote: post #279

Are any of these engineers East Asian immigrants or Asian Americans? From my own circles both near and extended, it seems like there is a much more even split within especially East Asian H1Bs and to a less degree Asian Americans? This may be from my own experience of hearing Asian parents push children regardless of gender towards STEM. It keeps leading me back to the idea that increased volition allows gender diffe…

The 2015 stackoverflow survey has this interesting statement: "Developers in India are 3-times more likely to be female than developers in the United States." See https://insights.stackoverflow.com/survey/2015 Actually it is worse than it sounds because most of the female developers in the United States are H1Bs from India, China and other Asian countries, and Romania and other eastern-European countries. If you subt…

I think the discrepancy between American women and immigrant women is interesting. I'm not sure we can conclude from the given evidence that the difference is reduced impediments. It could be that that the increased economic opportunity (or potential immigration benefits) makes up for other things.

Re: Ask a Female Engineer: Thoughts on the Google Memo

#436

Post by ianmiers » Tue, Aug 15, 2017, 9:37 PM UTC

hedgew wrote: post #21

Many of the more reasonable criticisms of the memo say that it wasn't written well enough; it could've been more considerate, it should have used better language, or better presentation. In this particular link, Scott Alexander is used as an example of better writing, and he certainly is one of the best and most persuasive modern writers I've found. However, I can not imagine ever matching his talent and output, even…

It's not the quality, it's the intent. He went for an adversarial debate, not a discussion.

The memo reads as him knowingly and intentionally starting a fight. My assumption, from reading the memo, was that he was expressing an opinion he knew to be controversial, knew would upset people, but wanted to make a point of proving he was right anyway in the face of those upset people. It reads a lot like the vaguely provocative way people write about such things on twitter/reddit/here.

In a work environment, that approach can and will get you fired. It should cause you career problems even if you do it for mundane things like type theory, or memory management, or distributed systems. Do it on something controversial and cause a huge problem for the company, and of course they are going to fire you. Especially since in this context adversarial = hostile work environment.

Re: Ask a Female Engineer: Thoughts on the Google Memo

#437

Post by RealityNow » Tue, Aug 15, 2017, 9:37 PM UTC

astrocat wrote: post #395

> Edith: I disagree completely and utterly that the (yes, real) average differences between men and women map to being better or worse at certain jobs. Interest in certain jobs, certainly. This is, I think, the key. We can all recognize that there are REAL, average differences in interests between men and women, DEFINITELY driven by society/culture, and maybe by biology/genetics... BUT, this has absolutely no correla…

I can't speak to Google's hiring policy, but affirmative action indeed gives preference to underrepresented minorities at the expense of more qualified people on the basis of gender/race. If you want quantitative data, just look at test scores of underrepresented minorities vs white/Asian men at competitive high schools and universities.

You can sugar coat it all you want, but it's still discrimination on the basis of gender/race.

Re: Ask a Female Engineer: Thoughts on the Google Memo

#438

Post by mathw » Tue, Aug 15, 2017, 9:37 PM UTC

mpweiher wrote: post #295

baitbiter wrote: post #135

Even more harm is done by Affirmative Action for women now being implemented in all companies. Feminism has given up on the aspect of competing and turned to shaming all men. There are several professions where women dominate with > 80%. Where's all this fucking outrage in those?

Considering women make up >50% of college graduates, for every profession that has more men there are more profession that have more women (or a greater imbalance). How about: People are capable of choosing professions they like. Respect their choices and don't second guess them.

That doesn't account for the cultural pressure on girls throughout childhood to be princesses, like pink things and cooking and babies and ponies, while boys are supposed to like computers and engineering and guns.

We're still preparing girls to stay home, cook dinner and have babies while the men go out and earn the money.

Re: Ask a Female Engineer: Thoughts on the Google Memo

#439

Post by fche » Tue, Aug 15, 2017, 9:37 PM UTC

If female engineers need to worry that, in the aftermath of the memo, people will wonder their genuine qualifications, they should not aim their blame toward the memo. The only people overtly and explicitly injecting non-qualification factors into hiring are affirmative-action type people. They created the quandary.

Re: Ask a Female Engineer: Thoughts on the Google Memo

#440

Post by seanmcdirmid » Tue, Aug 15, 2017, 9:37 PM UTC

camgunz wrote: post #377

nicolashahn wrote: post #253

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not talking about a woman having to prove her technical ability to her male coworkers at work because of their prejudices. I know that that's bullshit and I'm sorry they have to do so. I'm talking about handling what Damore claimed in an intellectually honest way. You can't dismiss his points just because you're tired of talking about them (or what you think are the same points you've always been talking about, b…

> We should be able to talk about his arguments honestly and rationally without falling back on gendered reasons at this point at least. We are and lots of people are doing so, but another point made in this post is that the workplace isn't the venue for this.

These things are talked about at the workplace, however. Just around the water cooler in private rather than out in the open. It is getting super weird and awkward these days where many people claim to adhere to the accepted diversity story in public but obviously don't in private.