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

One Google Staffer Fired, Two Others Put on Leave Amid Tensions

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

551–560 of 603 posts

Re: One Google Staffer Fired, Two Others Put on Leave Amid Tensions

#551

Post by flukus »

pas wrote: post #207
flukus wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Advocating for parental leave? Politics. Mothers rooms? Politics. Prayer rooms? Politics. Trans inclusive health care? Politics. Domestic partner benefits? Politics. Yep all politics. As political issues they should be dealt with in the political arena of whichever branch of government is responsible. If you strongly believe in these rights and priveleges you'd be spending your time advocating for universal access…

What this has to do with state/country level politics (sure, besides everything, but)? You are simply saying to your employer (or potential employer) that I have this need (healthcare, mothers' room, 4 day workweek, whatever), and that were they willing to provide that you are going to work there. Naturally if many people band together that constitutes a better bargaining strategy. (Sounds familiar?) But unions and a…

> You are simply saying to your employer (or potential employer) that I have this need (healthcare, mothers' room, 4 day workweek, whatever), and that were they willing to provide that you are going to work there.

You are simply saying to your employer (or potential employer) that I have this need (disabled toilets, minimum wage, safe working conditions, whatever), and that were they willing to provide that you are going to work there.

Should we end government disability regulations and let workers negotiate it for themselves? Is it really too much too ask governments to provide a base regulation for prayer rooms like they do disabled toilets? Minimum working conditions have always been set by government, especially for people who lack job mobility, which is why I consider a privileged few campaigning to do it at there tech corp to be selfish.

Re: One Google Staffer Fired, Two Others Put on Leave Amid Tensions

#552

Post by mav3rick »

akhilcacharya wrote: post #123
mav3rick wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"From the people I know " Cherry pick the 5 people you know. 99% of people will join Google on HN. So will most of Amazon. Don't kid yourself.

You can’t possibly know that to a high degree of certainty, especially since you haven’t explained why you think so. I sure hope this isn’t what happens inside of Google - doesn’t sound like an inclusive atmosphere to look down on others!

The average Google offer is way higher than Amazon. There are stats to prove this. Even without the offer the benefits are way better. The hiring bar is higher. Look around you...very few people make the opposite move. You will probably retort with some hyperbole. But everyone knows that this is the truth.

Re: One Google Staffer Fired, Two Others Put on Leave Amid Tensions

#553

Post by austhrow743 »

leftyted wrote: post #320
DagAgren wrote: post #280

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Your colleagues are not an authentic social network who you can organise with and pursue activism. This is absolutely, 100% false. This is exactly what you SHOULD do, and this is what unions are for. Always organise with coworkers. Otherwise you are giving employers more power over you than you should.

My empoyer doesn't have a lot of power over me. I'm a programmer not a coal miner. I don't want to be in a union. I don't want to join some club. I don't want to pay dues. I don't want to read newsletters or listen to speeches or be involved at all in the grubby, underhanded manuevering for power that would come with a union. And I'm tired of people condescendingly telling me that I'm wrong for feeling this way. I'm…

Don't volunteer at a soup kitchen as a software engineer if you want to do good. Volunteer at a soup kitchen if you want to get some warm fuzzies. It's near a complete waste of your time from a doing good standpoint. You have a highly in demand, specialised skillset. Use it to earn money and donate to a soup kitchen (or a more efficient charity) instead.

Hardness of an activity or it involving things you don't want to see have no bearing to its goodness.

Re: One Google Staffer Fired, Two Others Put on Leave Amid Tensions

#554

Post by JohnBooty »

bzbarsky wrote: post #515
JohnBooty wrote: post #289

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Generally, yes, I agree. However there are a lot of beliefs that make this kind of approach unworkable. If XYZ wants to believe that the earth is flat, sure, that can just be a personal belief and won't interfere with his work duties... well, unless he is launching satellites for NASA. If XYZ is a furry and thinks anime girls in cat outfits are hot, sure, that's cool too. Also a personal belief that probably won't in…

The interesting thing is that the hypothetical "publishes views about how X are inferior" is considered OK if "X" is "male" or "white", say. I understand the arguments from a structural racism/sexism standpoint for treating those situations differently from the ones you describe, but the specific test you propose seems to fail just as much: can you trust someone who thinks men are inferior in a job where they might h…

It was meant to be gender-neutral. I ought to have used "they," for clarity's sake.

Re: One Google Staffer Fired, Two Others Put on Leave Amid Tensions

#555

Post by JohnBooty »

tomatotomato37 wrote: post #370
matthewmacleod wrote: post #323

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is, though, that politics is inherently tied up in actions related to the workplace. Let’s say one of your colleagues or managers occasionally makes decisions that would be frowned upon by some people. Maybe you’re recruiting, and they let slip that they passed over a female candidate because they thought she might have a child soon. Or maybe they passed on a gay man because they didn’t think he should be…

The issue isn't that workplace practices can be political, the issue is practicing political activism for your own pet cause in the workplace on company time and expecting literally no retribution. A lot of the pain points come from the fact that in practice it's turning out a lot of the politics in debate are only vaguely related to the specific company's actual activity.

    the issue is practicing political activism 
    for your own pet cause in the workplace on 
    company time
I agree, but that's not remotely what was happening here.

Re: One Google Staffer Fired, Two Others Put on Leave Amid Tensions

#556

Post by Zenbit_UX »

manfredo wrote: post #437
SquishyPanda23 wrote: post #368

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I read the whole thing word for word. I recognized the language and wording from scientific racism tracts. I also tracked down his fundraiser which I haven't seen covered in the news.

It wasn't "scientific racism". First of all its discussion of science pertained to differences in gender, not race. And the author did not argue that women were worse at engineering, but rather that gender differences affect preferences . While other people may have used his memo to justify sexist beliefs about the capability of female engineers, attributing those words to the original author is at best intellectuall…

100% agree. Of the people I know that read the memo (incl women), I know of none who disagreed with it. It's genuinely hard to disagree as he presented facts backed by research to support a theory on the gender balance in tech.

I will add that many people who only read articles paraphrasing and quoting it, did seem to react unfavorably, likely taking the opinion the article wished to portray.

Re: One Google Staffer Fired, Two Others Put on Leave Amid Tensions

#557

Post by dang »

notzuck wrote: post #544
dang wrote: post #510

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We've banned this account for repeatedly breaking the site guidelines and ignoring our request to stop. If you don't want to be banned, you're welcome to email hn@ycombinator.com and give us reason to believe that you'll follow the rules in the future. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

I've never received a warning?

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21288934

Re: One Google Staffer Fired, Two Others Put on Leave Amid Tensions

#558

Post by akhilcacharya »

mav3rick wrote: post #552
akhilcacharya wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can’t possibly know that to a high degree of certainty, especially since you haven’t explained why you think so. I sure hope this isn’t what happens inside of Google - doesn’t sound like an inclusive atmosphere to look down on others!

The average Google offer is way higher than Amazon. There are stats to prove this. Even without the offer the benefits are way better. The hiring bar is higher. Look around you...very few people make the opposite move. You will probably retort with some hyperbole. But everyone knows that this is the truth.

> The hiring bar is higher.

I don't really understand what your point here is. Do you have any evidence that it's higher? I thought interviewing was supposed to be "random".

> Look around you...very few people make the opposite move.

I work with a handful of people that did, actually

> But everyone knows that this is the truth.

You're, uh..really not helping the brand here dude..

Re: One Google Staffer Fired, Two Others Put on Leave Amid Tensions

#560

Post by flatb »

manfredo wrote: post #526
flatb wrote: post #523

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes: the claims James Damore makes are cold, hard facts based on the many, many studies and statistics available on, for example, women's assertiveness (which is genetically and biologically quantifiable), that he carefully reviewed and contrasted in order to form an opinion. As such, they are facts, which do not fit the definition of discriminatory. In order to be discriminatory, they would have to be broad, ignoran…

> In order to be discriminatory, they would have to be broad, ignorant statements based on personal anecdote and prejudice that he pulled out of his ass right before adding 'on average' at the end of the phrase; since they are not that in any way, but carefully researched, unbiased observations, they do not fit the definition of discriminatory. If you think that there is no difference between saying people who belong…

I'll keep it simple, so that you can't keep obtusely ignoring it: there are stats on rape. So they are fact. There are no stats on "women's assertiveness". So they are not fact.
Post reply on HN