James Damore has filed a class action lawsuit against Google • Hacker News Board

Re: James Damore has filed a class action lawsuit against Google

#721

Post by omikun » Tue, Jan 09, 2018, 12:24 AM UTC

dotnetisnotdead wrote: post #296

Honestly, this whole thing is just ugly. I read what he wrote. It was (mostly) ugly but contained a lot of truth. Before you downvote/call me a Nazi, I'm a mixed race woman in tech. I definitely see people hired just because of their minority status. I also see people hired who are minorities but also great at their job. It's not a binary pattern. But those who are hired just because they are a POC or female, yet are…

> I do think that men and women are biologically different and, it likely does contribute to a lack of interest in tech from women.

I don't think anyone believes in the opposite, that biological difference in gender plays exactly zero part in lack of interest in tech from women. The memo was suggesting this could play a part, but not whether if biological differences are significant or even meaningful.

To the best of my knowledge, we can't disentangle biological from cultural biases across gender. Hunting down biological reasons isn't productive and threatens gender equality initiatives, hence the massive backlash.

Should we question the ideals of gender equality in the workplace? That's probably the discussion the memo wanted to inspire, but it only led to out cries of "sheeple better wake up" and "hell no."

Re: James Damore has filed a class action lawsuit against Google

#722

Post by hinkley » Tue, Jan 09, 2018, 12:25 AM UTC

jasonlotito wrote: post #349

saint_fiasco wrote: post #244

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Has that worked in the past? I've never made a fuckup of nearly the same magnitude, but the times I made a mistake in public apologizing always made things worse.

Yes. 100% it has worked. I've fucked up in the past, apologized, and made things much, much better. Edit: I feel some might be reading this wrong. I'm did not say it works 100% of the time. I said that I'm 100% certain it has worked because it's worked for me.

You’ve apologized to an angry mob. When?

Re: James Damore has filed a class action lawsuit against Google

#723

Post by jacksmith21006 » Tue, Jan 09, 2018, 12:33 AM UTC

The most fascinating part of all of this is who thought up making it a social justice issue? Gen up the right wing? Also it is really that easy to manipulate them?

I mean we have an employee who does not work in HR and I do not think a manager working on something that has nothing to do with their job. Something people are fired for everyday.

Then on top is negative no matter how you look at it towards other employees that makes it impossible to keep and have him on a team. Double firable offence and Google would be wrong not have.

Then it is freaking California where the law is in the employer side.

But somehow it has become some weird rally call for the alt right and the abuse of white guys which I am actually am one of.

Someone should write a book. It is just insane how easily some are being manipulated. But there must be something deeper inside that makes it this easy that for some reason I am missing as a white guy.

Why do we have angry white guys? Why not me?

Re: James Damore has filed a class action lawsuit against Google

#724

Post by Bainos » Tue, Jan 09, 2018, 12:39 AM UTC

mpweiher wrote: post #484

chasing wrote: post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Then he published an internal memo arguing against that stance."

Feedback was explicitly solicited, and he published it in that forum. If the company doesn't want views that might contradict current policy, it should not solicit feedback.

Asking for feedback doesn't mean allowing the employees to make discriminatory statements contradicting the company's policies and degrading its image (whether hurting the image of the company was intentional or not).

Re: James Damore has filed a class action lawsuit against Google

#725

Post by Idontknowmyuser » Tue, Jan 09, 2018, 12:42 AM UTC

UncleMeat wrote: post #477

Idontknowmyuser wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

women are better at empathy, due to biological reasons. women ,on average not all women of course, go into fields that need more empathy on average. they endup having less skills in this field on average because more of them went and studied another field due to biological reasons. source: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19476221 from the abstract: "This study contributes information on women's greater empathic d…

Does this paper actually demonstrate the "due to biological reasons" part?

You are correct I took a conclusion that my data might not support. the paper measured empathy in the same group at age 13 and age 16 they found that girls had higher empathy at both ages but the difference increased with age.

there is also this study: "Testosterone may reduce empathy by reducing brain connectivity" http://www.psypost.org/2016/03/testosterone-may-reduce-empat...

"Half of the women were given an orally administered dose of testosterone sufficient to increase the levels of the hormone in their blood by a factor of ten, while the other half received a placebo. The women who were given testosterone subsequently took significantly longer to identify the emotions depicted images of eyes, and made significantly more errors while doing so."

Re: James Damore has filed a class action lawsuit against Google

#726

Post by Goladus » Tue, Jan 09, 2018, 12:44 AM UTC

hinkley wrote: post #430

Idontknowmyuser wrote: post #376

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hate the fact that you need to state "you're a mixed race woman in tech.". I'm not blaming you, I'm blaming the outrage culture instilled in big part by a bigoted academic clique.

In any discussion of a social problem there are apologists. There are only so many ways to signal that you’re not a shill. It’s not a great solution, but we don’t have better. I agree on the data thing. I think when you get down to the bottom of things, lumping people under a label and treating them as a cohesive unit is part of the problem. If that’s true, getting permission from a small cohort of that group is stil…

There are only so many ways to signal that you’re not a shill. It’s not a great solution, but we don’t have better.

Or, people can learn to read and act on the content of an argument rather than immediately trying to discredit someone with appeals to popular bigotry.

Re: James Damore has filed a class action lawsuit against Google

#727

Post by Goladus » Tue, Jan 09, 2018, 12:48 AM UTC

ebbv wrote: post #108

take4 wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actual quote: > the distribution of preferences and abilities of men and women differ in part due to biological causes From the article: > women may not be equally represented in tech because they are biologically less capable of engineering Do you not see the difference?

Yeah, I do see the difference; the second sentence is spelling out plainly the bigotry he's trying to cloak in faux intellectualism. It's always the same kind of crap from bigots. "Women MIGHT be less capable of engineering." "Black people MIGHT be more prone to crime." "Gay people MIGHT be more likely to be pedophiles." and it's always based in bigotry, not in science or evidence.

Yeah, I do see the difference; the second sentence is spelling out plainly the bigotry he's trying to cloak in faux intellectualism.

If you want to make a case that someone means something other than what they clearly say (or write) then you should have a convincing argument to justify such a claim. Otherwise you're just projecting your prejudices on the discussion.

Re: James Damore has filed a class action lawsuit against Google

#728

Post by justifier » Tue, Jan 09, 2018, 12:49 AM UTC

manigandham wrote: post #560

pillowkusis wrote: post #504

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think many companies aren’t promoting “diversity” to support an ideology, they do it because it has specific PR and legal outcomes that help their image. Companies with high diversity metrics get praised in the press. Companies with low diversity metrics get negative attention. Diversity metrics are also a solid defense in real courts and the court of public opinion when race/gender/sexual harassment claims come up…

That seems to me like an idealogy of its own, but what exactly are diversity metrics measuring then? Appearance and other unchangeable physical traits? How unfortunate since they have nothing to do with interests, abilities, or character.

> but what exactly are diversity metrics measuring then?

Perhaps a willingness to have a dialogue

Much like how when debating the advocacy for a higher education degree I have heard people defend the effort as evidence to accept direction and a capacity to see something through to the end

I think there is merit in what of my own opinion I recognise in your commenting critically of diversity efforts

gp> Diversity based on outward appearance is one of the most convoluted and ridiculous movements ever.

Namely, that you think people should be met with openness and that contemporary diversity efforts seem to restrict that openness

But I feel that is using individual logic on systems

I think the proponents of diversity efforts would most likely support individual openness as well because they also recognise the systemic structures that currently restrict that openness

Like how a degree implies broad connotation about your ability to be a professional in a field when only representing a fraction of what real experience you will utilise in that profession

These diversity efforts seem to be implying generalised correlation to identify inequalities that are restricting universal openness and modifying their behaviour to remove the identifier

Or perhaps they are showing they are willing to use legal measures if exclusive minds refuse to recognise the data supporting "The only thing we can objectively and accurately measure"

Re: James Damore has filed a class action lawsuit against Google

#729

Post by s73ver_ » Tue, Jan 09, 2018, 12:55 AM UTC

dotnetisnotdead wrote: post #296

Honestly, this whole thing is just ugly. I read what he wrote. It was (mostly) ugly but contained a lot of truth. Before you downvote/call me a Nazi, I'm a mixed race woman in tech. I definitely see people hired just because of their minority status. I also see people hired who are minorities but also great at their job. It's not a binary pattern. But those who are hired just because they are a POC or female, yet are…

"It was (mostly) ugly but contained a lot of truth."

That's just it; it really did not. It contained a lot of things that people who aren't members of those groups he targeted think are plausible.

"I do think that men and women are biologically different and, it likely does contribute to a lack of interest in tech from women. "

And what, specifically, would those differences be?

Re: James Damore has filed a class action lawsuit against Google

#730

Post by stcredzero » Tue, Jan 09, 2018, 12:56 AM UTC

akvadrako wrote: post #698

bduerst wrote: post #675

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1. And my point is that even with it's correctly understood, it is still incorrect. I agree that the entire document was overly vague and open to interpreters inserting their own ideas, usually tied to their own political identity. 2. Appealing to number of citations is an appeal to popularity (fallacy) because it avoids criticizing the content. It's also not "unseating" the big five, just demonstrating how the big f…

So your point is that, even though the reporters neglected to explain (or understand) the term neurotic, they were justified because the ultimately correct explanation is that it's meaningless in context? In that case, the only proper response is to report that the word neurotic is not scientific.

In that case, the only proper response is to report that the word neurotic is not scientific.

I think that's a discussion worth having. That would've been a lot better than just firing the guy!