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

Google Fires Employee Behind Controversial Diversity Memo

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

831–840 of 1001 posts

Re: Google Fires Employee Behind Controversial Diversity Memo

#831

Post by bjourne »

bowlofpetunias wrote: post #674
mehwoot wrote: post #243

Reading the letter, what surprised me was how political it was, framing everything as a "left vs right" cultural fight. I think if it was up to me I'd probably fire anybody on either side of that debate who started circulating shit like this. As soon as you're on that level, nothing good is going to come of it and you're just going to make a lot of people angry, which is very bad for the business in a lot of differen…

Saying "the workplace is no place for politics" is basically saying the workplace is no place to be human. All workplaces are political. The politics of founder/owners/executives are in every fiber of he workplace. Denying it is highly disingenuous. Moreover, said denial is one of the root causes why we are having these issues. The tech industry likes to project an image of being "liberal", when in fact the culture i…

What people mean by "the workplace is no place for politics" is that the workplace is no place for employees to express their political views. E.g see this Quora question: https://www.quora.com/How-not-to-get-fired-while-organizing-... The first answer is depressingly: "First, learn all you can about union organizing and learn to keep your mouth shut. Accept the fact that eventually they will know who you are." You can also use Google and find about a million examples of people who have been fired for trying to unionize workplaces.

We have already accepted that de facto some speech is suppressed in the work place. That's why I think this story is a little hypocritical. Lots of people are arguing for this persons right to express his opinion that men are more suited than women to work in tech, but no one is defending workers rights to advocate for improved labor conditions.

Fwiw, I definitely don't think Google should be allowed to fire him. But I feel a little ambivalent about defending him, since "his side" wouldn't defend my rights to voice my opinion.

Re: Google Fires Employee Behind Controversial Diversity Memo

#832

Post by bneumann »

mattmanser wrote: post #694
ThomPete wrote: post #658

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Gender based diversity programs are hurting more than they are helping because they are confusing the role of gender diversity with the role of talent diversity. These programs are most likely not responsible for qualified women getting jobs and even if they are they are also responsible for qualified men not getting the jobs so nothing is really gained. The idea of qualification is something that is misunderstood fa…

The cold, hard facts prove that unless we force a change, it will not change. The simple counter argument to this, and what changed my mind utterly, was that the number of woman on boards never changed. "Women will setup companies" was what they said in the 70s, 50 years ago. It never worked until we started forcing it. There's still a ridiculously small percentage of female chairs. There's still a ridiculously small…

There question is not whether gender imbalances exist. The question is whether it's a "problem": Most kindergarten teachers are women. Is that a problem? Most lumberjacks are men. Is that a problem? Most graduating pharmacists are women. Is that a problem? Most graduating CS are men. Is that a problem? Most college graduates are women. Is that a problem? Most (93%) work-related deaths are men. Is that a problem? Most garbage collectors are men. Is that a problem? Most dentists are men. Is that a problem? Most fisherman are men. Is that a problem? Most pilots are men. Is that a problem? Most childcare workers are women. Is that a problem?

Notice how there are literally hundreds of DIFFERENCES that we can identify. But that we only want to call it a PROBLEM in certain instances. Who gets to say what is a "natural difference" that we can ignore, and what is a "problem" that we should move heaven and earth in order to try to "solve" it?

Re: Google Fires Employee Behind Controversial Diversity Memo

#833

Post by wolco »

zero_shift wrote: post #807
slackingoff2017 wrote: post #714

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You imply bias in the the hiring process is what is causing the gender imbalance in tech. Indicators such university enrollment in CS programs show that this is unlikely to be the case. If the author is wrong, that there definitely isn't some inherit genetic behavioral bias influencing job choice, than the bias is happening before students finish highschool. I'm a proponent for an "early bias" theory because of far l…

> You imply bias in the the hiring process is what is causing the gender imbalance in tech. Indicators such university enrollment in CS programs show that this is unlikely to be the case. You are assuming that women are choosing their college degrees in a vacuum. They don't. They ask: can I see myself doing this job? Is this a worthwhile investment? And when they cannot see themselves working in tech, because they se…

I think that is the core of the problem. People who need to see other people do something first don't have the burning desire.

I've countless interviews with vets. When a person becomes a vet they do it because they want to help animals or want money and to help but rarely because someone else did it before them who looks like them.

Re: Google Fires Employee Behind Controversial Diversity Memo

#834

Post by hyperdunc »

ebola1717 wrote: post #204
zorpner wrote: post #25

Good. I get that HN is not into this, but this employee stated, bluntly, that they don't believe many of their colleagues should be there because of their sex. Every peer review, every no-hire, every interaction , is and should be suspect. Happy where I am now, but future interviews will include me asking what management would do about this, and termination is the only correct answer. This is textbook hostile environ…

Yeah, Hacker News is a nightmare any time an issue like this happens, but I'm glad at least that some people out in the real world see this for what it is. This engineer deserved to be fired. I mean there's hundreds of of bro-y all-male "meritocratic" tech startups he can go join, so this still just a slap on the wrist.

It must feel great to see things so clearly. The people on HN causing this nightmare surely deserve your contempt rather than your consideration.

Re: Google Fires Employee Behind Controversial Diversity Memo

#835

Post by saturdaysaint »

jorgemf wrote: post #235
tunesmith wrote: post #123

People can't seem to summarize his argument without getting much of it grossly wrong, because his manifesto was a haphazard collection of good points, bad points, good arguments, lousy arguments, misrepresentations of others' views, and unstated implications. A perfect recipe for people to argue past each other about it. It's worth remembering that one of his conclusions was to end or replace gender-based diversity p…

> If gender-based diversity programs are responsible for qualified women getting jobs that they otherwise wouldn't have gotten due to bias, then the lack of that program means those women wouldn't have gotten those jobs. This is a double sword thing. With the program you might hire more qualified women, but also more less qualified women and you might prevent of hiring more qualified men. Because you have to hire wom…

"If I were I woman (or belong to minority) I would prefer to be being hired without any diversity program."

This is like saying "I'd enjoy my success more without the Mortgage Interest Deduction unfairly advantaging me financially". Theoretically feasible, but in practical reality, uh no. If you're hacking it in a competitive environment and you have a life, you most assuredly have 1,000 more important/interesting things on your mind.

Re: Google Fires Employee Behind Controversial Diversity Memo

#836

Post by wst_ »

zero_shift wrote: post #807
slackingoff2017 wrote: post #714

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You imply bias in the the hiring process is what is causing the gender imbalance in tech. Indicators such university enrollment in CS programs show that this is unlikely to be the case. If the author is wrong, that there definitely isn't some inherit genetic behavioral bias influencing job choice, than the bias is happening before students finish highschool. I'm a proponent for an "early bias" theory because of far l…

> You imply bias in the the hiring process is what is causing the gender imbalance in tech. Indicators such university enrollment in CS programs show that this is unlikely to be the case. You are assuming that women are choosing their college degrees in a vacuum. They don't. They ask: can I see myself doing this job? Is this a worthwhile investment? And when they cannot see themselves working in tech, because they se…

> You are assuming that women are choosing their college degrees in a vacuum. They don't. They ask: can I see myself doing this job? Is this a worthwhile investment? And when they cannot see themselves working in tech, because they see no-one like themselves in IT, they choose other fields.

If anyone, man or woman, decides to pursuit a given career because they can see others like them in the field, then really, I am grateful they don't. I want to work with people who deeply care about their choices. Who are dreamers. Who are willing to give a lot to fulfill their drive for knowledge. Who learns out of sheer curiosity of the world around them. Who can ask a meaningful questions. Who believe in what they do. Not with a sheep who chooses to follow other sheep.

If people want diversity at work, they should start with elementary school first. Do not assume any biological equality or lack of it up front but also do not ENFORCE any. Just give people equal rights to study and to make their own choices.

Re: Google Fires Employee Behind Controversial Diversity Memo

#837

Post by notyourday »

zero_shift wrote: post #807
slackingoff2017 wrote: post #714

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You imply bias in the the hiring process is what is causing the gender imbalance in tech. Indicators such university enrollment in CS programs show that this is unlikely to be the case. If the author is wrong, that there definitely isn't some inherit genetic behavioral bias influencing job choice, than the bias is happening before students finish highschool. I'm a proponent for an "early bias" theory because of far l…

> You imply bias in the the hiring process is what is causing the gender imbalance in tech. Indicators such university enrollment in CS programs show that this is unlikely to be the case. You are assuming that women are choosing their college degrees in a vacuum. They don't. They ask: can I see myself doing this job? Is this a worthwhile investment? And when they cannot see themselves working in tech, because they se…

> You are assuming that women are choosing their college degrees in a vacuum. They don't. They ask: can I see myself doing this job? Is this a worthwhile investment? And when they cannot see themselves working in tech, because they see no-one like themselves in IT, they choose other fields

I have a hunch you graduated a relatively long time ago and do not socialize with people who are currently in school. People do not have to declare major for two first years in school. Outside those doing pre-med or pharmacy students do not need to take any hard science/math/cs classes ( the later in a lot of schools taught in math departments ) for years. Early juniors are the first ones who need to decide on a major and boy is CS low on that list ( why would one want to spend next two years cramming math, CS, and physics into the schedule class after class when one can take a few creative courses and graduate with liberal arts degree? ).

> What specific mistakes can you point to? What particular solutions are within reach of the government? Because right now it just looks like you're shifting responsibility onto the state.

Allowing Jack and Suzy to take $100k loans to for a degree in operating a coffee machine.

Re: Google Fires Employee Behind Controversial Diversity Memo

#838

Post by faceplanted »

moduspol wrote: post #796
postnihilism wrote: post #275

This feels like the blue and black (white and gold) dress. It boggles my mind that people don't see the fundamental and toxic misogyny in this 'manifesto'. Please have a woman you care about in your life, preferably one in tech, read this and then ask their opinion of the piece. The "treat people as individuals, not as just another member of their group" sentiment of the author is fine except that we have hundreds of…

> 10 page pseudo-intellectual manifestos about your inherent inferiority at performing in technical and leadership roles Is there any way to discuss generalized differences that won't be perceived as absolute and insulting? The memo clearly did not make any claims about all women, and the topic at hand (gender representation in roles) is a general one. If there are general differences between men and women, we could…

>Is there any way to discuss generalized differences that won't be perceived as absolute and insulting?

Whatever it is, I don't want to hear it in an internal memo, I don't want to hear anyone's opinions in a memo unless it's about the product.

Honestly, in a workplace, if I didn't ask for your opinion on something and we're no talking about it in person, I don't care.

Re: Google Fires Employee Behind Controversial Diversity Memo

#839

Post by dijit »

groupthinkqmark wrote: post #38
Afforess wrote: post #4

I read the memo and didn't find it particularly persuasive; but this dismissal does further its core point. It's a bit tone deaf of Google to fire an employee concerned about groupthink.

This is not a workable argument against firing someone. If it were, all you'd have to do is say, "We have too much group-think here," followed by any egregiously awful statement, and you'd be insulated from consequences. That's just not how these things work. I think any good argument against firing him has to hinge on the truth of what he said besides the group-think claims. Regrettably for him, I don't think there'…

Except the fact that people who study the field tend to agree with him on most things: http://quillette.com/2017/08/07/google-memo-four-scientists-...

Re: Google Fires Employee Behind Controversial Diversity Memo

#840

Post by jorgemf »

saturdaysaint wrote: post #835
jorgemf wrote: post #235

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If gender-based diversity programs are responsible for qualified women getting jobs that they otherwise wouldn't have gotten due to bias, then the lack of that program means those women wouldn't have gotten those jobs. This is a double sword thing. With the program you might hire more qualified women, but also more less qualified women and you might prevent of hiring more qualified men. Because you have to hire wom…

"If I were I woman (or belong to minority) I would prefer to be being hired without any diversity program." This is like saying "I'd enjoy my success more without the Mortgage Interest Deduction unfairly advantaging me financially". Theoretically feasible, but in practical reality, uh no. If you're hacking it in a competitive environment and you have a life, you most assuredly have 1,000 more important/interesting th…

You have to strive for the things you want in live, nothing is easy for anyone.

Do I want a better salary? a better job? yes. But I want a quality of life, I don't want to work long hours. So I wont have something better because I have other preferences in life. And I am ok with it.

Post reply on HN