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

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

#821

Post by vfulco » Tue, Jan 09, 2018, 4:25 AM UTC

stcredzero wrote: post #538

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 read what he wrote. It was (mostly) ugly but contained a lot of truth. Many of the media interpretations of what James Damore wrote were very biased, and effectively amounted to hit pieces. His use of terms like "Trait Neuroticism" were direct uses of psychological terms which just sound bad as everyday English. Evolutionary Biology also tends to have a "dismal" feeling to it, like Economics can. One can't take fie…

The topic matter was above the IQ of the vast majority of the protesters so we got a mob rule, peasant like response.

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

#822

Post by ocdtrekkie » Tue, Jan 09, 2018, 4:26 AM UTC

bduerst wrote: post #785

ocdtrekkie wrote: post #684

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bearing in mind he has no reason to apologize for "the memo as a whole", how should he approach this? He's already said many times he was not saying what people are claiming he has said. It hasn't worked. Should he release a version 2 of the memo with the benefit of maybe someone else to help him edit it? How would that be received by his critics or the press? Is there really anything he can say or do that will redee…

I guess I don't get your point about him being on the spectrum and how that means he accidentally may say offensive things. If that were true, as you say, wouldn't he have realized that in something like this?

I would think so, but I don't speak for everyone on the spectrum. I can't imagine someone in 2017 thinking "hey, lemme write an anti-diversity memo at Google, that'll go over well".

From the impression I've gleaned, Googlers seem to strongly believe what is said in Google stays in Google and people there believe their coworkers are generally open-minded, extremely intelligent individuals. He may have believed he was in an environment where this was not as much of a mistake as it very obviously, in hindsight, was.

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

#823

Post by ryguytilidie » Tue, Jan 09, 2018, 4:29 AM UTC

mistermann wrote: post #752

ryguytilidie wrote: post #524

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So it sounds like you agree with me that he lacked an understanding of how to behave in a workplace?

I agree only in a sense similar to how people in a wheelchair lack the capability to access public spaces in the same way as non-disabled people do. It's funny how even in a highly logical technical community the conversations on certain topics are the same as you'd find elsewhere.

To be clear, your analogy is that this fellow lashing out at certain groups of his coworkers can be attributed to their mental disorder you've diagnosed and you've then decided that this is the same as a person in a wheelchair being unable to access certain areas? I'm understanding this correctly? You're sure this is an analogy you think is passably decent let alone one that can be be followed up with you mocking other people afterward...? What are we hoping to accomplish here?

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

#824

Post by stcredzero » Tue, Jan 09, 2018, 4:31 AM UTC

bduerst wrote: post #791

stcredzero wrote: post #690

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Incorrectly using evidence to support your opinion as you broadcast it at work Sorry, but while your observation is interesting, there is nothing incorrect about citing such evidence. Especially when it means incorrectly classifying your co-workers and trying to change how your work fights social biases. Exactly how did James Damore go about classifying specific co-workers? [Citation Needed] Seriously, cite James Dam…

Sure - The example in context to this thread is right here in Damore's memo: > Women, on average, have more: > - Openness directed towards feelings and aesthetics rather than ideas... > - Extraversion expressed as gregariousness rather than assertiveness... > - Neuroticism... Damore supports this with a link [1] to a Wikipedia article, which immediately says: > On the scales measured by the Big Five personality trait…

This is incorrectly classifying your women coworkers as being, among other things, more neurotic than their male counterparts.

Just because there is correlational evidence for the general population, it doesn't automatically follow that any given explictly selected population (such as Google's employee population) follows the stated correlation. Does he say so explicitly, and can you honestly rule out a speculative reading of his memo? I asked you for James Damore citing any particular coworker as having any particular quality. Still, the best you can do is to nitpick words and impute motives.

Also, what's particularly wrong with sensitive, agreeable, and warm people? I'm quite sensitive, though I'm only agreeable and warm in certain contexts. I could see how all of those traits could be of great benefit to developing many of Google's apps. Your implication that those traits are somehow bad also smacks of bias.

Given all the above, it sure seems like I could purport to read between the lines and say that you have some kind of vested interest in a particular reading of his memo, but my doing so would be falling into the very kind of irrational projection I'm self-referentially citing. So am I wrong in making this kind of projection? If I'm wrong for doing that, then it would seem you're wrong for your projections as well. If you say I'm correct about the projection, well, I'll take that just as well.

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

#825

Post by vfulco » Tue, Jan 09, 2018, 4:36 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…

The really sad part is you have to preface your comments with this "Before you downvote/call me a Nazi, I'm a mixed race woman in tech." Somehow this gives you legitimacy in the eyes of others, not the power and logic of your argument. It speaks to the left's misguided philosophy of "free speech so long as we approve what you say."

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

#826

Post by stale2002 » Tue, Jan 09, 2018, 4:39 AM UTC

jacksmith21006 wrote: post #803

stale2002 wrote: post #771

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean, the law is the law. The person I was responding to specifically suggested making politics not allow at work. This suggestion is illegal. California law is extremely pro employee.

Actually California is very pro employer and maybe what you meant? Google obviously has a lot of reasons to fire Damore but they do not even need a reason. Former Google engineer sitting at home unemployed and unable to find a job supports he should have been fired.

Google can fire people for no reason, but that can't fire people for an illegal reason.

And google definitely didn't fire him for no reason.

It is illegal to engage in "Forbidding or preventing employees from engaging or participating in politics or from becoming candidates for public office."

Here is the california law in question:

http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection...

If there are smoking gun emails that say "We are going to fire him for his politics", then Google broke the law.

All this information will come out during the lawsuit, and during discovery, if it exists.

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

#827

Post by OCASM » Tue, Jan 09, 2018, 4:40 AM UTC

jacksmith21006 wrote: post #800

OCASM wrote: post #699

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He did nothing wrong.

Obviously he did. Weird that is not obvious. But Google does not need a reason. BTW, the fact that a former Google engineer is sitting at home unemployed would suggest he did do something wrong.

Because Google unjustly firing somebody is obviously impossible.

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

#828

Post by Goladus » Tue, Jan 09, 2018, 4:44 AM UTC

wpietri wrote: post #649

saas_co_de wrote: post #481

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This can definitely be the case. There are lots of sh--ty white male programmers working in the industry. I have met plenty of white men who have masters level CS education, have worked for Google and other top name companies, and can't produce a line of useful working code to save their lives. The reasons why corporations frequently hire people who don't actually produce anything are varied and complex, but it happe…

And I'd add that there's evidence (and plenty of anecdote) that the men who most object to diversity are not so good at what they do. Which makes sense; they are the ones who have the most to lose from an increased talent pool. [1] Personally, I'd be very interested to see Damore's code. We already know that he lied about both a PhD and being a chess master. [2] I would not be shocked at all to find out that he's not…

> We already know that he lied about a PhD

No, he did not lie about this. You are lying about it. His linkedin listed him as having been part of a PhD program and people took it to mean he had a PhD. There is absolutely no evidence he ever intended to mislead anyone about this.

So, please stop spreading lies.

    ====

PS I know because I actually saw the linkedin profile before he edited it. It did not say he had a PhD. It clearly listed that he was in the program for 2 years, which any person reasonably familiar with PhD programs would immediately suspect meant that he had not finished. And indeed, I followed up by looking up what publications he had, and while his name was on a couple of papers he had clearly not published a dissertation. So, to anyone who wasn't deliberately looking to discredit him for malicious or self-interested reasons, as Business Insider's Natasha Tiku almost certainly was, would not have been fooled for a second by his profile nor would they have believed that Damore intended to fool them.

Note the business insider article you linked uses these weasel words:

James Damore, the fired Google engineer who wrote the now-infamous memo on diversity at the company, has removed mention of PhD studies in biology from his LinkedIn profile.

The removal comes after Wired writer Nitasha Tiku confirmed with Harvard that Damore has not completed his PhD.

He then goes on to call out the "Right-wing argument" appealing to his credibility because he had a PhD.

If you read carefully, you'll see that they frame as if it was this embarassing thing that they'd shamed him into doing, to encourage lazy, non-critical readers to reach the same conclusion that you did, while using the technically correct words to avoid defamation liability. But, careful analysis of the facts shows that I am correct. He did not lie about the PhD, others either lied on his behalf without his knowledge; or were confused by careless/overly-optimistic reading of the LinkedIn profile.

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

#829

Post by Goladus » Tue, Jan 09, 2018, 5:13 AM UTC

jhanschoo wrote: post #746

stcredzero wrote: post #538

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I read what he wrote. It was (mostly) ugly but contained a lot of truth. Many of the media interpretations of what James Damore wrote were very biased, and effectively amounted to hit pieces. His use of terms like "Trait Neuroticism" were direct uses of psychological terms which just sound bad as everyday English. Evolutionary Biology also tends to have a "dismal" feeling to it, like Economics can. One can't take fie…

I agree. It seemed to me that Damore's memo was nevertheless fallacious, though nevertheless totally unworthy of the criticism that he received. Unlike in fields we are used to, psychological results have remarkably little prescriptive power given the inherently complex and malleable nature of social structures, and it's still pretty much up in the air how much or little effect nature has on preferences and to what e…

"American women" as a class now have a sufficiently loud voice

Why is it important that they have a sufficiently loud voice "as a class?" This seems backwards to me. The whole point of liberation is liberation to be treated as an individual not as a member of a class based on something contextually irrelevant like your biological sex.

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

#830

Post by swingedseraph » Tue, Jan 09, 2018, 5:17 AM UTC

dotnetisnotdead wrote: post #757

Gusbenz wrote: post #685

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does she even bother looking at the docs or would that also denote how useless she is?

Well, she is learning it now and I wouldn't call her "useless". But her level of experience and knowledge is far below "software engineer" and if she were a guy she couldn't get away with it.

> and if she were a guy she couldn't get away with it

I think this is untrue. I know a lot of male "sofware engineers" who are totally incompetent and remain well employed.