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

Google removes its head of diversity after 2007 blog post surfaces

businessinsider.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

531–540 of 1001 posts

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

#531

Post by xdennis »

ebin1 wrote: post #359

Something says to me that if he said "Europeans" instead, it would be ok. Of course, it is hard for me to back up this claim, other than with the anecdotal data that such comments are common on (liberal) Twitter and the like. In a world with so many protected classes, this former head of diversity made the really foolish mistake of not making a remark at the expense of one of the lesser protected classes, instead. Ed…

> if he said "Europeans" instead, it would be ok

Only if he said "Western Europeans + Russia". The rest of us didn't colonize anyone.

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

#532

Post by tootie »

siculars wrote: post #135
tootie wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Being Jewish is also multi-tiered because it's associated with both a religion and an ethnicity. I'd love to popularize being thought of Ashkenazi and not Jewish. I don't have a familial bond with Israel for probably 17 centuries and I don't really care if I ever did. My culture is more strongly associated with Eastern Europe and we were run out of town on a rail 100 years ago.

If you were your ancestors who were "run out of town on a rail" you would care very, very deeply about your familial bond to Israel. Like yours, my family was run out of town. Unlike yours, many in my family did not run fast enough. If only there was a place they could run to either as first resort or when quota had been reached in other places. If only there was a place that could make running a specific people out…

Why? We were run out of Israel on a rail too. Ancestry of any kind means nothing to me. Sunk cost. As far as I'm concerned, my ancestral homeland is New York. And I'm pretty happy with that. My wife's parents are from Korea and they had a rough time there. They think of New York as home too. Speaking of new ethnic identities, I think of my kids as being Neoamerican.

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

#533

Post by nashashmi »

lgleason wrote: post #247

Live by the sword, die by the sword. That said, firing him, like they did with Damore would have been more consistent. Because everyone is under arbitration agreements that always benefit the company, vs the courts where you might have a shot at justice, they have no incentive to do that. As repugnant as his past anti-semitic rant was, people change and sometimes say and do stupid things. In a sane world this guy wou…

I don’t see how his words based on the article were anti Semitic. They were anti Israel. And I find that you and everyone here and at google are having a hard time distinguishing between the two.

Further based on the other comment to this post he was quite an activist. Fighting for rights of the racially oppressed and in minority.

He went against white people and Israel? He is not racist. He is just anti majority dominant power holder.

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

#534

Post by CivBase »

I actually think this was handled well.

I'm normally against taking punitive action against employees for old social media content. People make mistakes and they should be allowed to grow and improve without being held permanently accountable for their past selves. However, this isn't like James Gunn being fired for old jokes with bad taste. This person was Google's head of diversity and he posted serious, blatantly-antisemitic arguments. That post would compromise his credibility with subordinates - not just as a person, but as a leader with a focus on diversity.

I like how Google reassigned him instead of firing him. It's an old post and he has hopefully changed for the better since then. He's no longer fit for his previous role, but there are probably many other roles he can still be effective in. I don't want to see someone crushed for past mistakes if they've learned from them.

IMO, this sets a good precedent for how to handle issues like this in the future. Hopefully other companies are taking notes.

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

#535

Post by tootie »

whimsicalism wrote: post #102
tootie wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Being Jewish is also multi-tiered because it's associated with both a religion and an ethnicity. I'd love to popularize being thought of Ashkenazi and not Jewish. I don't have a familial bond with Israel for probably 17 centuries and I don't really care if I ever did. My culture is more strongly associated with Eastern Europe and we were run out of town on a rail 100 years ago.

The popular understanding of Jewish in America is Ashkenazi

My point being that the word "Ashkenazi" is still not understood by most people.

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

#536

Post by AzzieElbab »

stefan_ wrote: post #428
JeremyNT wrote: post #393

> As repugnant as his past anti-semitic rant was, people change and sometimes say and do stupid things. In a sane world this guy would not have been removed from his position and Damore would not have been fired. Instead we could have had a conversation to win hearts and minds, but today it is all about getting scalps, witch hunts and over-reaction. What we are currently doing sends people underground which radicaliz…

He typod Israeli as Jew? Geez, quite the common mistake these days.

Equally wrong and one-sided

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

#537

Post by rocknor »

tshaddox wrote: post #500
JPKab wrote: post #468

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Companies are diverse as a side effect of hiring for competence. They aren't competent as a side effect of hiring with diversity as a goal. The statistically illiterate HR minions who preach the correlation between diversity and performance don't get this, because they aren't even educated enough to understand correlation/causation fallacy.

When you’re making products for a diverse group of people, perhaps having a diverse team is required for competence.

This is probably the biggest reason, they are building products used by virtually everyone on the planet, they cannot afford mistakes that could arise just because their employees only represent a small percentage of human diversity. If all diverse groups were equally well-off, or all they understood the existence and power of privilege, or there was no risk of the built products putting certain groups at a disadvantage, maybe we wouldn't need to do this. But we know that's not true.

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

#538

Post by brianberns »

haberman wrote: post #490
brianberns wrote: post #347

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He suggested that biological differences between the sexes (rather than bias/discrimination) are the reason why women are underrepresented in the tech industry. It’s not hard to understand why many people find this offensive. Here’s the direct quote if you need it: “I’m simply stating that the distribution of preferences and abilities of men and women differ in part due to biological causes and that these differences…

Damore's quote says "in part" and "may explain," suggesting the possibility of multiple causes, and making clear that there is uncertainty. Your paraphrase says "the reason" and "rather than bias/descrimination", suggesting both certainty and only a single cause. How do you reconcile this difference between your paraphrase and Damore's quote?

That’s why I used the word “suggested”, which is exactly what he did, in a section prominently titled “Possible non-bias causes of the gender gap in tech”.

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

#539

Post by [deleted] »

whimsicalism wrote: post #102
tootie wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Being Jewish is also multi-tiered because it's associated with both a religion and an ethnicity. I'd love to popularize being thought of Ashkenazi and not Jewish. I don't have a familial bond with Israel for probably 17 centuries and I don't really care if I ever did. My culture is more strongly associated with Eastern Europe and we were run out of town on a rail 100 years ago.

The popular understanding of Jewish in America is Ashkenazi

[deleted]

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

#540

Post by BeFlatXIII »

gher-shyu3i wrote: post #518
cheese_van wrote: post #466

I've lived in various ME countries, as well as Israel. I've tried to understand the core issue and frankly, failed. Both arguments about this historical conflict between Israel and the Palestinians seem as close to being morally equivalent as I could imagine. I have sympathies but I keep them to myself. I don't feel as though I have a right to take a particular side: I am not existentially threatened on a daily basis…

> I've tried to understand the core issue and frankly, failed It's quite straight forward. Up until WWI, Jews, Christians, and Muslims lived in Palestine, which it and other areas of Arabia and North Africa were under Ottoman rule. During WWI, Sykes–Picot divided up the Muslim lands into arbitrary borders to make them easier to occupy. Syria was occupied by the French, Libya by the Italians, etc. Palestine was under…

…and how exactly are they supposed to “get back their rightful land”?
Post reply on HN