Sundar Pichai Should Resign as Google’s C.E.O • Hacker News Board

Re: Sundar Pichai Should Resign as Google’s C.E.O

#471

Post by dennisgorelik » Sat, Aug 12, 2017, 1:08 AM UTC

dropstickle wrote: post #433

dahart wrote: post #417

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The overweight example was an attempt to clarify that even though statistical averages say something about a group, it does not say something about the individual, i.e the google females should not feel singled out by statistical averages. Right. And what I've been trying to say is that the statistical averages aren't the offensive part. That's a straw man. Google women don't feel offended when they're told they're…

> Right. And what I've been trying to say is that the statistical averages aren't the offensive part. That's a straw man. Well you did pose the question, I just answered it, so it was not to erect a straw man, and I was not really trying to contradict the rest of your claim by that example, maybe I should have been clearer on that. > Sure, the memo didn't say it explicitly, but it did imply that. Everyone keeps defen…

This is a better sound quality video of Steven Pinker arguments: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n691pLhQBkw

Re: Sundar Pichai Should Resign as Google’s C.E.O

#472

Post by ltrcola » Sat, Aug 12, 2017, 3:09 AM UTC

luckydude wrote: post #470

ltrcola wrote: post #458

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I actually find that highly unlikely. Look how fast Damore has been involved with the conservative media. That aside, if he was really convicted in his opinion, do you think he would take the money?

My take, and it's worth what you paid for it which is nothing, is that he was genuine in his opinions. I didn't get that he had a conservative axe to grind (I did get a sense that he might lean that way) but it didn't seem like he was trying to move the needle to the left or to the right, he was trying to find a better way to do what google was trying to do. What I'm trying to say is that I think the conservative med…

I'm not convinced. His repeated use of the words "echo chamber" seems fairly indicative of his views, and I don't think it simply leans conservative. This is all just conjecture though.

But either way, if he didn't take the money and went public it would turn out worse for Google, possibly even legally. They really took the only action they could, in my opinion.

Re: Sundar Pichai Should Resign as Google’s C.E.O

#473

Post by avs733 » Sat, Aug 12, 2017, 3:17 AM UTC

Spivak wrote: post #444

avs733 wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While I agree, I think brook's argument is even more easily dismissable as the BS it is. One of several reasons for citing material on which an argument is based is to trace the flow of knowledge and tie statements to the prior research they interpret. James fundamentally misinterpreted much of the research he cited in ways that are overly summative to make a point he wanted to make. He sought research to give his bi…

Okay, help me out here. People keep saying that he mischaracterized existing research but then we have qualified people in the field saying that he got it right. https://beta.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/no-the-google-manif...

This is deserving of a response obviously...and it is a vitally important point to understand clearly because the ramifications go beyond just this incident. I don't have a chance to write something tonight but I will try and write it up tomorrow and either post it here or post it on my blog.

Re: Sundar Pichai Should Resign as Google’s C.E.O

#474

Post by ltrcola » Sat, Aug 12, 2017, 3:22 AM UTC

manigandham wrote: post #461

ltrcola wrote: post #456

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think they necessarily can, in the interest of fostering a welcoming and safe environment for students to learn. Example: "Let's not be scared of having an open, honest, and frank discussion of how Jews have caused the decline of the country." Do you see how ridiculous that sounds and why a university could not in good faith legitimize the proponents of that theory? Now I'm not saying all issues are as black…

> welcoming and safe environment Words are not going to hurt anyone, actions will. Students (and all people) should absolutely be protected from harmful actions but we cannot stop discourse just because it sounds offensive to someone, no matter the subject.

Words and actions are inextricably linked in complicated ways. I don't know anything about who you are or your situation, but I will say that the "sticks and stones" attitude is much easier to believe in if you've never been in a minority group. I used to buy into it, in fact, until a big bag of empathy hit me like a truck as I got older.

Even the conservatives and alt-righters admin this, which is why they're so upset about people using politically correct language, even by their own free choice. "Happy Holidays" anyone?

I, for one, would find it pretty disadvantageous in my studies to attend classes at an institution that endorses (even silently) a viewpoint that questions my right to the pursuit of happiness, to marry who I want, to be the correct gender, or even to exist. Organizations can and do limit that speech in certain environments that they are responsible for.

That said, the first amendment is hugely important, but limited in scope in the consequences that it protects you from.

Of course, it _is_ important to not simply refuse to hear or allow speech that you disagree with. There is a balance to be struck there.

Re: Sundar Pichai Should Resign as Google’s C.E.O

#475

Post by ltrcola » Sat, Aug 12, 2017, 3:23 AM UTC

ghaff wrote: post #459

ltrcola wrote: post #456

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think they necessarily can, in the interest of fostering a welcoming and safe environment for students to learn. Example: "Let's not be scared of having an open, honest, and frank discussion of how Jews have caused the decline of the country." Do you see how ridiculous that sounds and why a university could not in good faith legitimize the proponents of that theory? Now I'm not saying all issues are as black…

By and large, I do think that college students do need to be able to deal with viewpoints that hurt or offend them. That doesn't include signs on their dorm doors or people getting in their faces but it does include speakers who they may not like.

I generally agree, but there is a line. See my comment above for a longer take on that.

Re: Sundar Pichai Should Resign as Google’s C.E.O

#476

Post by ltrcola » Sat, Aug 12, 2017, 3:33 AM UTC

manigandham wrote: post #460

ltrcola wrote: post #454

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually, if you read it closely, this is not true. True, he does suggest a lot of potential actions that could create a more beneficial tech culture for women, but then he goes on to suggest that Google needs to determine if these types of changes would impact Google's productivity in a negative way. This is a pretty heavy implication that these programs do not in fact have any value and that diversity is not valuab…

I didn't see that clause about productivity, can you quote that piece of the memo? https://diversitymemo.com/ Yonatan's response was an emotional tirade, refusing to debate any of the cited research and using a different context of empathy. Nobody is debating the value of empathy in engineering (and it's good to have for any job and life in general, nothing specific to tech), but empathy in setting policy is complete…

Here is the section from the memo that I'm referencing:

> Philosophically, I don’t think we should do arbitrary social engineering of tech just to make it appealing to equal portions of both men and women. For each of these changes, we need principled reasons for why it helps Google; that is, we should be optimizing for Google—with Google’s diversity being a component of that. For example currently those trying to work extra hours or take extra stress will inevitably get ahead and if we try to change that too much, it may have disastrous consequences. Also, when considering the costs and benefits, we should keep in mind that Google’s funding is finite so its allocation is more zero-sum than is generally acknowledged.

In general I agree that a rational analysis and science based approach is valuable. In fact, I think research into diversity actually does support the idea that it provides benefits. But it's not simply as black and white as science good, empathy/moralizing bad.

For instance, it may be objectively better for a company to do a lot of things that we consider immoral or harmful to society. For instance, how much does maternity and paternity leave cost a company in productivity, time, and the expense of providing a replacement worker? In fact, it might just be more profitable not to hire women of childbearing age at all, which actually was socially accepted for a long time. But these days our society has come to the general conclusion that this is actually morally unacceptable, and the benefits to parents and society outweigh the costs to the company. A very similar argument could be employed regarding the hiring of employees in the reserves or national guard.

I think you have to look at things holistically, as an entire system, and yes, morally.

Re: Sundar Pichai Should Resign as Google’s C.E.O

#477

Post by urahara » Sat, Aug 12, 2017, 7:20 AM UTC

Yetanfou wrote: post #453

urahara wrote: post #263

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Open culture does not mean that actions that make environment more hostile to some group inside the company should not be punished. The 'memo' definitely did that to his female coworkers. That's why the story is not about open culture or freedom of speech, but in the first place about creating unhealthy environment for a particular group inside the company and setting a really bad precedent. Maybe the guy meant well,…

In what way did that memo make the environment 'more hostile to... his female coworkers'? I read the thing from start to finish and back again, checked the references and did not find anything which would serve to create a 'hostile environment'. Yes, he does question some of the programs at Google which discriminate against men (by refusing them access to resources solely based on their gender) but that criticism doe…

In a very subtle and non-evident way. He doesn't do it directly, but as a whole, given the 'memo's structure and its tone, it creates wrong assumptions, ignores important points, emphasizes secondary ones, creates doubts where there is nothing to doubt about and doesn't question things that should be questioned instead, which in general presents an incompetent and harmful way of thinking about the subject. It's like someone would write an essay with a list of science-based points on why raping children is natural and suggest to doubt that it is a crime. Its pretty easy to kind of support any bad thing with scientific facts and make it look right, but doing this is bad in the first place. His post provokes subtle doubts on very sensitive things like female competence and questions if diversity is important enough to tolerate a risk of not hiring the most qualified person. Given what we know about the hardships women often face in society and at work, provoking doubts around those subjects does no good. At least, not in the way he presented the whole topic.

Re: Sundar Pichai Should Resign as Google’s C.E.O

#478

Post by acjohnson55 » Sat, Aug 12, 2017, 8:20 AM UTC

lisper wrote: post #33

The primary thesis of Damore's memo [1] was not that women are biologically unsuited to STEM careers. The primary thesis was that, at Google, you cannot even advance the hypothesis that biology might be a factor without putting your career at risk. Ironically, by firing Damore, Pichai proved him correct. EDIT: if you doubt this, just look at the document's title and TL;DR section. [1] https://assets.documentcloud.org…

Primary thesis or not, that seemed to be the crux of his argument.

Re: Sundar Pichai Should Resign as Google’s C.E.O

#479

Post by danso » Sat, Aug 12, 2017, 8:22 AM UTC

Political debates aside (which I know is difficult to set aside since the memo is literally about politics), what is the actual threat to Google's bottom line, or its ongoing operations.

Obviously, if Damore's lawsuit succeed, Google will pay a penalty. But what other impacts will there be? This incident doesn't seem to have the same snowball potential of Susan Fowler's Uber essay, because Fowler wrote about sexual harassment, which put Uber in greater legal jeopardy than Damore has with Google (as far as we can tell, as Damore's complaint moves through the system).

#DeleteUber was a big thing on Twitter, did it have a noticeable impact on Uber's bottom line? I know Damore supporters have called for a Google boycott, but quitting Uber for Lyft seems easier than quitting Google for Bing, GMail for Yahoo, and YouTube for Vimeo/Twitch.

Damore's firing likely pissed off his like-minded colleagues. But based on what Damore claimed, non-liberal Googlers were already rare.

So what upcoming challenges/attacks would Google CEO's resignation head off?

Re: Sundar Pichai Should Resign as Google’s C.E.O

#480

Post by acjohnson55 » Sat, Aug 12, 2017, 8:24 AM UTC

where_do_i_live wrote: post #229

frgtpsswrdlame wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And he basically confirmed it by doing his first interview with Stefan Molyneux.

The memo appears to be based on actual real science that seems to be the consensus. However, the author appears to be completely tone deaf and extremely socially awkward - he has very poor communication skills. And lacking the understanding that there is a current culture war going on - to allow himself to be taken as a champion of some of those groups seems to show he is oblivious to the greater social/political dis…

He makes references to real science, but gets nowhere close to demonstrating that the effects he references should manifest themselves as an 80/20 gender ratio -- presumably worse, if his policy recommendations were adopted. Hell, I'm not even sure if the gender differences would make women worse at engineering, on average, anyway.