Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Full 10-Page Anti-Diversity Screed Circulating Internally at Google

gizmodo.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

491–500 of 660 posts

Re: The Full 10-Page Anti-Diversity Screed Circulating Internally at Google

#491

Post by LyndsySimon »

Pulcinella wrote: post #431
SamReidHughes wrote: post #422

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the context of there being measurable differences between the sets of males and females, 99% is binary enough.

"99% server uptime is enough!"

Indeed - we design systems to operate under the expectation that services are available. We handle their not being available as an exceptional case.

This seems analogous; we should design social structures (or allow social structures to emerge) that assume that individuals are male or female, but which handle the exceptional case of non-cisgendered individuals. Just like a software system that doesn't handle exceptions gracefully, a social system that lacks provisions for these is fundamentally flawed and can fail unexpectedly and potentially catastrophically.

Re: The Full 10-Page Anti-Diversity Screed Circulating Internally at Google

#492

Post by LyndsySimon »

santoshalper wrote: post #25
asploder wrote: post #7

It’s interesting that the author considers the conceptual framework of microaggressions spurious, while describing his negative experiences as a conservative Googler in terms of what a feminist might describe as microaggressions. To further undermine his own point, he asserts that several harms against conservatives have been caused by these microaggressions. The difference between effective negative feedback and har…

I noticed that as well. I find it interesting that the alt-right has started to embrace so much of modern feminist/liberal terminology and tacitly accepted so many of the premises. The modern alt-right conservative: "I don't believe in safe spaces, but please stop bullying me!"

Many on the right now use that terminology to implicitly underscore contradictions in those belief systems.

I think it would be a mistake to believe that they subscribe to those viewpoints. Rather, a core characteristic of conservativism is a desire for rules to be followed and equally enforced. Pointing out places where the left is inconsistent is their way of discrediting those views.

Re: The Full 10-Page Anti-Diversity Screed Circulating Internally at Google

#493

Post by LyndsySimon »

DalaiObama wrote: post #288
smhost wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This is incredibly disingenuous. > Much of the left considers simple disagreement to be micro-aggression... Tone down on the hypocrisy. If you want your side's arguments to be evaluated fairly, don't make ridiculous oversimplifications of the other side's positions.

Have you tried actually disagreeing with leftists? Many can handle it fine and have a decent discussion. But many will explode in self righteous rage and do all the things people blinded by hate do.

This is my experience as well. On the right, extremists tend to sort of "clam up" and just stop engaging in meaningful dialogue. On the left, they tend to attack the person challenging them.

I say this as as extreme libertarian, so I have my share of disagreements with both.

Re: The Full 10-Page Anti-Diversity Screed Circulating Internally at Google

#494

Post by taysic »

humanrebar wrote: post #367
taysic wrote: post #280

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While I agree with you, the article did not mention that any unfair advantage was being given to women yet I've seen so many claim this. Instead it says "the author argues that women are underrepresented in tech not because they face bias and discrimination in the workplace, but because of inherent psychological differences between men and women. " So instead it just seems to be arguing that there is no disadvantage…

> the article did not mention that any unfair advantage was being given to women yet I've seen so many claim this It does mention promotion preferences and special groups.

According to Google "For example, we took action when we saw that women in tech were less likely to self-nominate for promotions."

Sounds more like recognizing an imbalance than special promotions

Re: The Full 10-Page Anti-Diversity Screed Circulating Internally at Google

#495

Post by [deleted] »

pacala wrote: post #418
taysic wrote: post #321

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who says we need 50% women in tech? Has Google released a statement on this? While I have seen some inflammatory articles on the subject I don't know that many woman care if there are 50% woman in tech. I can tell you as a female engineer, I just hope that women know it's open to them and feel comfortable joining the field. I don't care about convincing uninterested people. Instead here are some of the issues Google…

Not Google, but there are tech companies out there that set hiring quotas significantly higher than what the CS schools are producing [~20% female for the past 10 years]. https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2017/04/why-is-... > Well, not quotas. You can’t say quotas. At least not in the United States. In some European countries, like Norway, real, actual quotas—for example, a rule saying that 40 percent of a…

[deleted]

Re: The Full 10-Page Anti-Diversity Screed Circulating Internally at Google

#496

Post by [deleted] »

pacala wrote: post #418
taysic wrote: post #321

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who says we need 50% women in tech? Has Google released a statement on this? While I have seen some inflammatory articles on the subject I don't know that many woman care if there are 50% woman in tech. I can tell you as a female engineer, I just hope that women know it's open to them and feel comfortable joining the field. I don't care about convincing uninterested people. Instead here are some of the issues Google…

Not Google, but there are tech companies out there that set hiring quotas significantly higher than what the CS schools are producing [~20% female for the past 10 years]. https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2017/04/why-is-... > Well, not quotas. You can’t say quotas. At least not in the United States. In some European countries, like Norway, real, actual quotas—for example, a rule saying that 40 percent of a…

[deleted]

Re: The Full 10-Page Anti-Diversity Screed Circulating Internally at Google

#497

Post by [deleted] »

pacala wrote: post #418
taysic wrote: post #321

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who says we need 50% women in tech? Has Google released a statement on this? While I have seen some inflammatory articles on the subject I don't know that many woman care if there are 50% woman in tech. I can tell you as a female engineer, I just hope that women know it's open to them and feel comfortable joining the field. I don't care about convincing uninterested people. Instead here are some of the issues Google…

Not Google, but there are tech companies out there that set hiring quotas significantly higher than what the CS schools are producing [~20% female for the past 10 years]. https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2017/04/why-is-... > Well, not quotas. You can’t say quotas. At least not in the United States. In some European countries, like Norway, real, actual quotas—for example, a rule saying that 40 percent of a…

[deleted]

Re: The Full 10-Page Anti-Diversity Screed Circulating Internally at Google

#498

Post by wfo »

remarkEon wrote: post #236
door wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

uh yeah i'd rather trust people who study society for a living for their opinions on social theory than some computer science major who has never taken a soft science class in his life

So your comment is (rightly) getting downvoted. I think readers here tend to reject anecdotal arguments and rely on data. The critiques of sociology and anthropology are legitimate: those fields are not like technical fields and they lend themselves to weird conclusions that don't get peer reviewed in a way that's different from, say, math or physics.

No, the critiques (at least that I've seen here) are ridiculous; HN is generally conservative STEM majors who have never studied anything seriously outside their tiny box of CS/engineering and possibly math/physics and think everything they don't understand is beneath them. It shows in this thread, it's almost painfully cringe-inducing to read. In order to make a reasonable critique of a field, you must first understand it, something which nearly zero HNers even make an attempt to do. They dismiss it out of hand without argument because it is not STEM and therefore not "rigorous" enough to even be considered by their superior STEM brains.

Are there problems in these fields? Sure, there are problems in every field. But I haven't seen a single reasonable point here or otherwise that provides a good reason for mistrusting the vast consensus among a wide variety of very smart people who have spent their entire lives studying these issues and instead trusting JavaProgrammer37 who stomps his feet and insists women just aren't smart like him, smart enough to write SQL queries.

Re: The Full 10-Page Anti-Diversity Screed Circulating Internally at Google

#499

Post by ThrowawayR2 »

Pulcinella wrote: post #419
Hasknewbie wrote: post #379

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the author is implicitly referring to more than simply unpleasant interactions at work. As someone who is neither American nor conservative, I have to give it to them that there is a level of virulence from some on the left that is far beyond mere microagression, but is not acknowledged as such: there are continuous attempts to ban some speeches on campuses. If a ban fails it is picketed (which is OK), someti…

So what you are saying is that there should be safe spaces for conservatives to express themselves? That conservatives should be welcomed for their diversity? That conservstives should be given a participation trophy and honored for their special snowflake ideas?

> So what you are saying is that there should be safe spaces for conservatives to express themselves? That conservatives should be welcomed for their diversity? That conservstives should be given a participation trophy and honored for their special snowflake ideas?

Good grief. Diversity of every imaginable kind is good except for diversity of thought apparently. Whatever happened to "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.", which used to be one of the core principles of liberalism? Has the identity politics-driven faction of the left fallen to the point where that has been abandoned too?

And even if principle weren't a consideration (somehow), consider that even if one chooses to ignore conservative speech and attempt to deny conservatives platforms from which they may speak, they do not magically wink out of existence. In fact, it may galvanize them, as the Democratic Party found to its sorrow in recent elections. Continuing to exclude and deny the beliefs of half the country is a recipe for political suicide, so the sooner that the mainstream left expels the identity politics faction, the better.

Re: The Full 10-Page Anti-Diversity Screed Circulating Internally at Google

#500

Post by wfo »

remarkEon wrote: post #426
Pulcinella wrote: post #412

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why? Evolutionary psychology (even if true) is completely unenlightening. Anyone can be an evolutionary psychologist!: "Men do [thing] because they evolved to." "Women think [this] because women who didn't did not pass on their genes."

Not going to engage further if your summation of Evolutionary Psychology is that it's "unenlightening". I can't stand this bizarre trend on the Left that holds up "science" as a vanguard in one context but dismisses it in another if it's politically convenient.

The fact that you whine about anyone disagreeing with you being some bogeyman you call "the Left" (which does not exist of course) is telling; instead, you should consider your discussion partners as people instead of the enemy, perhaps then you will provide arguments that are not you just stating the thing you desperately want to be true over and over again and we can all learn something.
Post reply on HN