James Damore and three others end Google suit • Hacker News Board

Re: James Damore and three others end Google suit

#91

Post by dgrin91 » Sat, May 09, 2020, 4:00 AM UTC

magic5227 wrote: post #77

daenz wrote: post #16

I remember at a previous job, a female engineer talking to other engineers when the Damore story broke. She said "I can't believe he said that women can't be good engineers" and indicated he deserved to be fired. As someone who actually read what he wrote, I just had to bite my tongue. That's not what he said at all , but even making the distinction makes you one of "them" and politicizes the workplace. It's just dis…

She's not wrong. He shared a manifesto about gender differences in the workplace. In it, he calls women neurotic. Whether people's read on the manifesto is reductive of his overall argument isn't the point. He showed a serious lack of judgement writing and posting that in his workplace. He should not have played the part of expert gender/psychology expert. A researcher he cites specifically disagrees with his takeawa…

What is a productive way to have this discussion? I can't think of any plausible way to have a discussion in this realm without serious risk of being ostracized.

Re: James Damore and three others end Google suit

#92

Post by jashmatthews » Sat, May 09, 2020, 4:02 AM UTC

look_lookatme wrote: post #72

ergothus wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> As someone who actually read what he wrote, I just had to bite my tongue. That's not what he said at all, As someone that also read it, those arent the words he used, but that is very much what he was saying. A facade of misrepresented psuedoscience doesnt change the intent, motivation, or reality.

That's not what he said. He said on average women do not prefer the field, and optimizing to change that observable fact is a fool's errand. I don't have an opinion on whether he's right or wrong but I don't think he shouldn't be able to make that argument...

> Hiring practices which can effectively lower the bar for “diversity” candidates by decreasing the false negative rate

Damore deliberately chose to cast doubt on whether the women Google hired were as good as the men. Otherwise, it's easier and less controversial to just argue that any form of discrimination is wrong.

Re: James Damore and three others end Google suit

#93

Post by manigandham » Sat, May 09, 2020, 4:06 AM UTC

Ididntdothis wrote: post #52

threeseed wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Politics doesn't belong in a professional environment. So employees should be avoiding the topic.

I don't like that attitude. We should be able to discuss politics without the need for judging each other.

Where does this ever happen well? There's a reason companies have made it a policy to avoid for decades.

Re: James Damore and three others end Google suit

#94

Post by belltaco » Sat, May 09, 2020, 4:11 AM UTC

look_lookatme wrote: post #12

Damore does not fit into the neat ideological right or left classification but it would be impossible for an institution like Bloomberg to have nuance on this issue. Just because some deplorable lifted him up doesn't mean he should be defined specifically on an ideological axis. But, of course, who gives a fuck. The rage machine rages on.

>Damore does not fit into the neat ideological right or left classification

Lets see, his lawyer for this suit who is quoted a lot in the article:

>Harmeet Kaur Dhillon is an American lawyer and Republican Party official. She is the former vice chairwoman of the California Republican Party, and the National Committeewoman of the Republican National Committee for California.

Wonder if it was pro-bono.

Re: James Damore and three others end Google suit

#95

Post by missingrib » Sat, May 09, 2020, 4:11 AM UTC

conception wrote: post #51

This topic is quickly going downhill in the comments, but I just wanted to clear some stuff up because there seems to be some "what he said isn't that bad!" People wrongly think he said women are bad or stupid but that's not what he did say. He also didn't -just- say men and women are different. He did say a 5-10% difference in certain traits is why there are huge discrepancies of women in leadership and science/engi…

>Sorry, but "girls don't like to make hard choices or do 'nerdy' things" isn't a real thing. Hundreds of years of "stay in the kitchen" is what proactive programs to bring women into these positions are trying to reverse. It's not biological.

Why do you think that?

Re: James Damore and three others end Google suit

#96

Post by Gibbon1 » Sat, May 09, 2020, 4:18 AM UTC

klipt wrote: post #75

streamingvac wrote: post #26

[flagged]

I'm no fan of totalitarian governments, but blaming America's problems with coronavirus on China seems like a reach to me - we had two months warning just from watching what happened in China and our government did literally no preparation during that time. I suspect if we'd had longer warning we would have just spent longer doing nothing.

2009 swine flu pandemic originated in Mexico and wasn't contained either. Killed 250,000 people. Don't see anyone blaming Mexico.

Flip side China and Vietnam have squelched the virus. While the Federal Government continues to do nothing leaving everything to various states.

Re: James Damore and three others end Google suit

#97

Post by koheripbal » Sat, May 09, 2020, 4:20 AM UTC

ergothus wrote: post #56

daenz wrote: post #16

I remember at a previous job, a female engineer talking to other engineers when the Damore story broke. She said "I can't believe he said that women can't be good engineers" and indicated he deserved to be fired. As someone who actually read what he wrote, I just had to bite my tongue. That's not what he said at all , but even making the distinction makes you one of "them" and politicizes the workplace. It's just dis…

> As someone who actually read what he wrote, I just had to bite my tongue. That's not what he said at all, As someone that also read it, those arent the words he used, but that is very much what he was saying. A facade of misrepresented psuedoscience doesnt change the intent, motivation, or reality.

It's so disappointing to read this. I don't see how his thesis of "everyone needs to be treated by their individual merits because personal variances grossly outweigh any gender bias" can be interpreted as sexist.

He was literally preaching for equality. His point was that affirmative action programs do companies a disservice by making minority/women employees seem like they didn't get there through their own merit, and also punishes companies that don't have sufficient women due to a lack of interest women have in programming - which may or may not be innate.

...and he was fired for that. Crazy.

Re: James Damore and three others end Google suit

#98

Post by koheripbal » Sat, May 09, 2020, 4:21 AM UTC

jashmatthews wrote: post #92

look_lookatme wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not what he said. He said on average women do not prefer the field, and optimizing to change that observable fact is a fool's errand. I don't have an opinion on whether he's right or wrong but I don't think he shouldn't be able to make that argument...

> Hiring practices which can effectively lower the bar for “diversity” candidates by decreasing the false negative rate Damore deliberately chose to cast doubt on whether the women Google hired were as good as the men. Otherwise, it's easier and less controversial to just argue that any form of discrimination is wrong.

"cast doubt". That's a weasel word, because he said nothing of the sort.

Re: James Damore and three others end Google suit

#99

Post by koheripbal » Sat, May 09, 2020, 4:23 AM UTC

magic5227 wrote: post #77

daenz wrote: post #16

I remember at a previous job, a female engineer talking to other engineers when the Damore story broke. She said "I can't believe he said that women can't be good engineers" and indicated he deserved to be fired. As someone who actually read what he wrote, I just had to bite my tongue. That's not what he said at all , but even making the distinction makes you one of "them" and politicizes the workplace. It's just dis…

She's not wrong. He shared a manifesto about gender differences in the workplace. In it, he calls women neurotic. Whether people's read on the manifesto is reductive of his overall argument isn't the point. He showed a serious lack of judgement writing and posting that in his workplace. He should not have played the part of expert gender/psychology expert. A researcher he cites specifically disagrees with his takeawa…

Calling it a "manifesto" is trying to give reader here some bias against it. Like he was some alt-right madman.

He wrote a post. Not a manifesto.

"There are productive ways to have these kinds of conversations"

Well obviously there aren't when posting a comment in an internal company forum gets you fired.

Re: James Damore and three others end Google suit

#100

Post by forgot_again » Sat, May 09, 2020, 4:23 AM UTC

jashmatthews wrote: post #92

look_lookatme wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not what he said. He said on average women do not prefer the field, and optimizing to change that observable fact is a fool's errand. I don't have an opinion on whether he's right or wrong but I don't think he shouldn't be able to make that argument...

> Hiring practices which can effectively lower the bar for “diversity” candidates by decreasing the false negative rate Damore deliberately chose to cast doubt on whether the women Google hired were as good as the men. Otherwise, it's easier and less controversial to just argue that any form of discrimination is wrong.

Given the existence of affirmative action policies in which gender gives a positive boost to some women and may compensate for some deficiency, technical or otherwise, that's a reasonable assumption to make.