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

Google removes its head of diversity after 2007 blog post surfaces

businessinsider.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

841–850 of 1001 posts

Re: Google removes its head of diversity after 2007 blog post surfaces

#841

Post by theossuary »

dragonwriter wrote: post #566
theossuary wrote: post #392

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm trying to understand what he did that was so wrong? He (correctly imo) called out Israel for its violent tendencies. The only mistake he made that I can see is he conflated Israel with the Jewish people generally. But Israel has a massive propaganda campaign leading people to do exactly that (an attack on Israel the country is an attack on Jewish people in general). If that blogpost was the same, but said Israel,…

> Israel themselves have fostered the narrative that Israel represents the Jewish people by constantly conflating an attack on Israel as an attack on the Jewish people. Israel’s attempts to equate itself and its current policies with the Jewish race and identity are definitely a reason (an additional reason, on top of many others) to be disgusted at the governing regime of the State of Israel and its government, but…

I think you and I are on the same wavelength, and I appreciate your take on this issue. It's tricky looking from the outside in with all of the misinformation though (hence my mention of the Israeli propaganda). And I definitely agree, nothing justifies antisemitism (to be honest, I really don't understand it either). I hate to be critical in these situations because I don't want to lend credence to those who'll jump in and pretend I'm on their Jewish hate train.

Re: Google removes its head of diversity after 2007 blog post surfaces

#842

Post by TMWNN »

inglor_cz wrote: post #761
HelloNurse wrote: post #371

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In revolutionary France the self-destruction process was fast, less than 10 years. What historical lessons can be applied to the current situation?

A Napoleonesque figure appearing soon. On Twitter, probably. Only half joking. After a certain time, most people get tired and afraid of constant paranoid vigilantism and start searching for protection. Any protection. And whoever gained positions of power from the previous tumult, will seek immunity from further revolutionary tumult, which is easiest to achieve by suppressing the worst Robespierres and ossifying the…

>From an outside perspective, it is striking how much the woke wave is waning compared to 2020. Trump is gone from Twitter, so a constant irritant has been removed, and people are starting to having a bit of a hangover.

The ongoing self-recrimination in the media over the mass insta-dismissing a year ago of all COVID19 lab leak discussion—despite zero new evidence[1]—being one prominent example of the above, of course.

[1] I don't mean to imply that I don't believe in the theory. On the contrary, I was amazed and alarmed to see how a year ago even stating that SARS-CoV-2 being accidentally leaked from the Wuhan labs was not impossible was censored by social media as "disinformation" and denounced by regular media as already having been "debunked", as opposed to a reasonable hypothesis worthy of exploration. My point is that, as far as I know, there is zero new evidence available today to support the reasonableness of said hypothesis versus a year ago. The only difference is that Trump is no longer in the White House.

Re: Google removes its head of diversity after 2007 blog post surfaces

#843

Post by TMWNN »

reccanti wrote: post #709
banannaise wrote: post #391

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He was not canceled by progressives. Equating anti-Zionism and anti-semitism is generally an anti-progressive stance in the US. This is progressive principles being morphed into a weapon to be used against progressives.

At least one of the sources in this article, the Washington Free Beacon, is financed by a right-wing activist. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Washington_Free_Beacon So yeah, doesn't really seem like a case of progressives eating-their-own

banannaise's point is that the rhetorical weapons used by the left to bludgeon its enemies can and are being used by others. As esyir said, "It's hard to feel any sympathy when that chicken comes home to roost".

Re: Google removes its head of diversity after 2007 blog post surfaces

#844

Post by danShumway »

datavirtue wrote: post #655
danShumway wrote: post #582

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Totally disagree. Even ignoring that diversity can be a goal in and of itself, and ignoring that a lack of diversity can be a useful metric for identifying other problems, there's also plenty of reason to believe that targeting diversity directly can yield performance improvements. If you're building a product for women, you should have some women on your team. If you're building a product for the general population,…

Yeah, we're talking past each other about two different things now. Classic.

How did you interpret JPKab's comment? Maybe I misunderstood, do you agree that a focus on increasing diversity can lead to better products and better company decisions?

Re: Google removes its head of diversity after 2007 blog post surfaces

#845

Post by sm4rk0 »

olivermarks wrote: post #820
sm4rk0 wrote: post #764

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And if there was a referendum: "Political correctness should be dismantled", I guess most people would vote "Hell yeah!". So much for democracy.

I don't understand your point. Are you suggesting 'political correctness' - a relatively new term and phenomenon largely enabled by the internet - was something installed by society and is a good thing, and that a vote to 'dismantle' it would be a bad thing?

No, quite the oposite.

Re: Google removes its head of diversity after 2007 blog post surfaces

#846

Post by TMWNN »

throw1103 wrote: post #85
anm89 wrote: post #12

This is the only instance relating to offensive social media I've ever heard of where someone got reassigned and not fired

Should you really be fired for things you said 13 years ago? Also we didn't see the entire context..

>Also we didn't see the entire context..

The original post is at https://web.archive.org/web/20210602000424/https://www.kamau... , including the final paragraph, which begins

>If I were a Jew I would be concerned about my insatiable appetite for war and killing in defense of myself.

Re: Google removes its head of diversity after 2007 blog post surfaces

#847

Post by timthorn »

FridayoLeary wrote: post #757
bryanrasmussen wrote: post #737

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Perhaps but i don't feel they deserve the benefit of the doubt. 14 years is a long time really, there are people who get the benefit of a doubt for murder after 14 years.

I wouldn't touch a murderer with a 10 foot pole.

Take a look at the Fishmongers Hall heroes. The narwhal tusk was only a 5 foot pole, but the convicted killers put themselves in harms way to protect the public.

Re: Google removes its head of diversity after 2007 blog post surfaces

#848

Post by anm89 »

zuminator wrote: post #602
anm89 wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Notice a pattern here? I wasn't talking about cops and teachers who have unions with political clout. Cops have done a hell of a lot worse then go on racist rants just to be reassigned. It's not apples to apples. But just to be over the top obnoxiously clear. I'm talking about the private sector.

The reason a disproportionate number of these articles are regarding public sector employees is because public institutions are publicly accountable, and therefore generally must respond to a controversy. A private sector firm is under no obligation to state how it is resolving a matter with an employee and may find it advantageous in terms of public image and legal liability to simply not comment if the employee has…

Chris Pratt isn't an employee. He can't be fired.

No idea who the other guy is but yes, you might have found an example. I have no doubt there are some out there. I could point you to the short novel length list of times it went the other way though.

Re: Google removes its head of diversity after 2007 blog post surfaces

#849

Post by TMWNN »

theossuary wrote: post #392
donatj wrote: post #55

What I have learned in recent years is how shockingly accepting of antisemitism people apparently are on both sides of aisle. Growing up in a prominently Jewish neighborhood in Minnesota I never really encountered it until maybe ten years ago. The fact that he was just shifted rather than fired in this political environment speaks volumes.

I'm trying to understand what he did that was so wrong? He (correctly imo) called out Israel for its violent tendencies. The only mistake he made that I can see is he conflated Israel with the Jewish people generally. But Israel has a massive propaganda campaign leading people to do exactly that (an attack on Israel the country is an attack on Jewish people in general). If that blogpost was the same, but said Israel,…

>EDIT: Reading more comments I think I get the gist of the controversy, he insinuated all Jewish people should feel guilt for the actions of Israel?

As always in these sorts of things (and life in general, really), judge for yourself https://web.archive.org/web/20210602000424/https://www.kamau... . The final paragraph begins

>If I were a Jew I would be concerned about my insatiable appetite for war and killing in defense of myself.

Re: Google removes its head of diversity after 2007 blog post surfaces

#850

Post by sanity31415 »

ackfoobar wrote: post #606
kbelder wrote: post #374

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is it false? Doesn't seem like something he would assert without a cite.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3149680/ Male: 2.68 SD: 0.65 Female: 2.94 SD:0.67 d: 0.39 Non-native English user here, it seems the word "neurotic" has some connotation that the trait "neuroticism" doesn't? And that's why it's received so poorly?

"Neurotic" does have a negative connotation in common usage, but it's also the term used by personality psychologists, it's the 'N' in the OCEAN personality model. It means "risk averse".
Post reply on HN