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

Google defends scrapping AI pledges and DEI goals in all-staff meeting

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 181 posts

Re: Google defends scrapping AI pledges and DEI goals in all-staff meeting

#81

Post by mitthrowaway2 »

edmundsauto wrote: post #73
bluedevil2k wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How does professional sports go through a DEI phase?? Professional sports are one of the few true meritocracies in the world, where the best players, no matter their race, religion or gender, will play.

I have a more nuanced take on whether professional sports are actually a meritocracy. It depends on the level at which you look. Yes, in any given event it’s generally fair to say the rules are equitable. However, look at golf - we can either accept white people have some genetic advantage, or that access is not equal and the best talent never got a chance to develop. This could be extended to other leagues as well.…

> look at golf

Tiger Woods is probably the only professional golfer that the average person knows by name.

Re: Google defends scrapping AI pledges and DEI goals in all-staff meeting

#82

Post by kbrannigan »

zombiwoof wrote: post #38
sympil wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is DEI discriminatory? Do you know of studies that have statistics to back up the claim?

I can tell you at Apple where I worked for almost a decade in the last year I see teams 99% made up of DEI hires. Apple should share the data.

are you saying that white people are inherently more qualified than anybody else .

Re: Google defends scrapping AI pledges and DEI goals in all-staff meeting

#83

Post by arkwin »

To the people defending the reduction in Google's DEI program, I want to tell you that you are missing the point.

For some reason, they think DEI means some unqualified woman or minority is taking the position over someone more qualified. That is not the case.

DEI was created because corporate leadership structures were "the good old boys club" where less qualified people were hired because they knew someone or were related to someone in the company over a more qualified candidate.

Still today, qualified job candidates do not get calls back because their name sounds foreign. [1, 2]

There are many reasons why qualified candidates cannot even get into the interview process.

[1] https://www.npr.org/2024/04/11/1243713272/resume-bias-study-... [2] https://www.npr.org/sections/codeswitch/2017/02/23/516823230...

Re: Google defends scrapping AI pledges and DEI goals in all-staff meeting

#84

Post by whimsicalism »

cauch wrote: post #78
whimsicalism wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

is affirmative action preferential? idk what to tell you, the way it plays out in practice is preferential on the basis of race. maybe that’s okay, but that is absolutely what it means

I think the point is that a big bunch of studies really point to the fact that if you have two persons with a real merit score of 8/10 (for example), the one from a minority will be considered, due to unconscious biases, as having a score of 7/10 instead. So, yes, there is a correction and this correction is based on race because this is the correct variable to de-bias the evaluation. But does it mean "preferential"?…

i’m very familiar with the arguments around DEI/AA. as i said in a different comment, i’m in favor of limited AA.

We have little data from jobs for various reasons - but if we look at the data from universities, the “correction” is clearly far in excess of any bias by race against same score candidates, which is why URM admits typically have significantly lower scores. It is only a correction if you are saying that it is also correcting for a lot more upstream stuff that might be causing the divergence in scores. There might be merit to the claim but it does also mean that the end result is you are picking worse candidates “on paper” on the basis of their skin color.

Re: Google defends scrapping AI pledges and DEI goals in all-staff meeting

#85

Post by pfisherman »

bluedevil2k wrote: post #58
CharlieDigital wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> these programs turned into a hub of biased discriminatory behavior Professional sports went through a "DEI" phase. Despite some rough patches, I'd say that it worked out for the better as a whole if you look at it in retrospect. Similarly, individual companies may have fumbled DEI initiatives, but years on, I think it will have had a (small) positive impact.

How does professional sports go through a DEI phase?? Professional sports are one of the few true meritocracies in the world, where the best players, no matter their race, religion or gender, will play.

See the “Rooney rule” in the NFL. Hiring female sports casters, referees, etc.

Re: Google defends scrapping AI pledges and DEI goals in all-staff meeting

#86

Post by sympil »

whimsicalism wrote: post #75
sympil wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

White men in the U.S. have a hard time coming to grips with living in a society where women have sexual autonomy and where they are subjected to genuine competition for jobs. Every POC hire over a white man must be becuase of DEI!

not sure who you are talking to, but it certainly isn’t stuff in my comment. have a good one, maybe spend a little less time on the news

It’s easy to demonize DEI for the reasons I stated above. It’s because I don’t follow the news media that I haven’t fallen for the DEI Scare that has gripped white society. It’s modern America’s version of blaming everything on communism.

We live in a society where no one calls a wholly unqualified moron like Hegseth a “DEI hire” but people referred to Karine Jean-Pierre as such.

Re: Google defends scrapping AI pledges and DEI goals in all-staff meeting

#87

Post by yagbo7 »

sympil wrote: post #50
whimsicalism wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

its preferential hiring or at minimum recruiting/sourcing on the basis of race, its discriminatory by definition

DEI is not about preferential hiring. It’s the opposite. It’s about broadening the perspectives so that one group that has enjoyed historical preferential hiring no longer gets preferential treatment.

That’s a circular definition; stating it’s not about preferential hiring but then saying it’s about not giving a certain demographic preferential treatment.

“Enjoyed” is not the right word either. It’s better explained by stating the tech industry is dominated by certain demographics because that’s just how it is, and DEI initiatives give preferential treatment to those who are not in those demographics, in an attempt to increase diversity, and give equitable opportunities, and make people feel included.

Re: Google defends scrapping AI pledges and DEI goals in all-staff meeting

#88

Post by whimsicalism »

sympil wrote: post #86
whimsicalism wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

not sure who you are talking to, but it certainly isn’t stuff in my comment. have a good one, maybe spend a little less time on the news

It’s easy to demonize DEI for the reasons I stated above. It’s because I don’t follow the news media that I haven’t fallen for the DEI Scare that has gripped white society. It’s modern America’s version of blaming everything on communism. We live in a society where no one calls a wholly unqualified moron like Hegseth a “DEI hire” but people referred to Karine Jean-Pierre as such.

i think there are two questions:

1. in practice, does “DEI”/AA typically mean using race to influence hiring decisions? i think the answer is unequivocally yes, not taking a position on the merit of doing so.

2. Has “DEI” become some sort of boogeyman that is almost equivalent to communism of a past era? Yes, I agree with you - it has really accelerated in the past year and people are using it in ways that don’t even make any sense or blaming it for things that clearly are unrelated.

But I never made a claim of the 2nd form. Hegseth is obviously a nepo hire, most plum book positions in general are nepo hires.

Re: Google defends scrapping AI pledges and DEI goals in all-staff meeting

#89

Post by whimsicalism »

yagbo7 wrote: post #87
sympil wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

DEI is not about preferential hiring. It’s the opposite. It’s about broadening the perspectives so that one group that has enjoyed historical preferential hiring no longer gets preferential treatment.

That’s a circular definition; stating it’s not about preferential hiring but then saying it’s about not giving a certain demographic preferential treatment. “Enjoyed” is not the right word either. It’s better explained by stating the tech industry is dominated by certain demographics because that’s just how it is, and DEI initiatives give preferential treatment to those who are not in those demographics, in an attemp…

great reply and i think hits on what i was trying to get at which is it is obviously discriminatory, but the merits of that discrimination are quite possibly positive or certainly up for debate.

Re: Google defends scrapping AI pledges and DEI goals in all-staff meeting

#90

Post by xiphias2 »

RustySpottedCat wrote: post #21
JCM9 wrote: post #13

The AI items are concerning. The DEI stuff though is gone and isn’t coming back. The concept was well intentioned but, quite ironically, these programs turned into a hub of biased discriminatory behavior and it was becoming increasingly hard to paint them as anything else.

There was a zero chance the company with the best AI LLM models would not get involved in weaponization, willingly or not. DAI is going to be one of the first things the next administration brings back, mark my words. Saying it's discriminatory is like saying affirmative action is discriminatory

DEI got an extreme level of support from NGOs even while Trump was the president that they won't have at the next election. I hope they can renew themselves.

The good news on the left side though that I don't think the next candidate could be worse than Kamala Harris.

Post reply on HN