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

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

#991

Post by collyw » Fri, Jan 12, 2018, 1:32 PM UTC

dlp211 wrote: post #809

vowelless wrote: post #403

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As I mentioned, I don't disparage "right wing". I actually enjoy Joe Rogans podcast, and also Dave Rubin and Jordan Peterson. All three of them are solidly classical liberal, which is probably right of center today (individualism vs. collectivism, equality of opportunity vs equality of outcome, etc). But AFAIK, damore never came to the young Turks, Chapo trap house, which are leftist podcasts. I could be wrong.

I'm sorry but I need to call this out. There is no difference between equality of opportunities and equality of outcomes for any significant population size. The latter is a direct consequence of the former; and anyone that believes we are close to having equality of opportunities in America is wilfully ignorant.

That sounds like absolute nonsense.

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

#992

Post by collyw » Fri, Jan 12, 2018, 2:30 PM UTC

fzeroracer wrote: post #241

ng12 wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know, I'm pretty liberal and I find political discussions on HN to be overbearing at times.

There are definitely some issues still on HN; I've had to argue with people here that think gay people don't deserve the right to get married and I've noticed people instantly downvoted into oblivion for mentioning that they're trans.

My guess is that it depends on whether you look on marriage as a religious custom or a legal custom. I can understand people not agreeing with it in the religious sense (as their special book says so).

Personally I say give everyone the same rights (i.e single people) and a large part of the problem would go away.

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

#993

Post by collyw » Fri, Jan 12, 2018, 2:34 PM UTC

ironjunkie wrote: post #621

lurr wrote: post #606

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except his point was indefensible, because it was (at best) poorly written.

we are all arguing about a 10 word quotes because that is what the media have chosen to focus on. If you read the full memo, you understand what he aims at and I don't think it is poorly written.

It's a lot better written than most of the articles critisizing it.

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

#994

Post by erikpukinskis » Fri, Jan 12, 2018, 5:26 PM UTC

Idontknowmyuser wrote: post #942

erikpukinskis wrote: post #903

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“We built our castle 300 miles away from where they live, but if any of them make it here we are 3% more likely to let them in the door. The men live in a village 1000 yards away, but we’re 3% less likely to let one in, so it’s fair.”

do you have any proof of this claims? and if they were true how and in what you way would this matter if we were to compare one individual to one individual instead of treating people like herds.

I didn’t make a claim.

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

#995

Post by pluto9 » Fri, Jan 12, 2018, 10:28 PM UTC

on_and_off wrote: post #986

TeMPOraL wrote: post #856

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You haven't been on the Internet in the past few years, have you? :). The fringe, while a small minority, has also been the loudest part of the feminist movement in this decade, and it's the impact of that fringe that can be seen responsible for such overreaction to Damore's memo.

Well, most of Damore's memo is not that shocking indeed although : - there are parts like this quote that made me go in one second from 'this is reasonable' to 'ok I see why he got fired' - some parts are just stupid .. even though neuroticism is the right term and is not negative, it is had deep negative connotations for many people (not to mention that the big 5 is not exactly an uncontroversial model). Just don't…

What word should he have used? Negative connotations or not, "neuroticism" is the accepted term for the Big Five trait he was referring to. Should he have made up his own name for it?

If he had, internet armchair scientists would be ridiculing him for being so uninformed about the topic that he didn't know the proper terminology.

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

#996

Post by pluto9 » Fri, Jan 12, 2018, 10:34 PM UTC

rainbowmverse wrote: post #413

saint_fiasco wrote: post #341

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Admitting you were wrong and apologizing in public , specifically. An individual can be reasoned with, placated. You can make reparations, promises that the other person will believe because of a precedent of mutual trust and forgiveness. However, you can't do that with an angry mob.

The angry mob is irrelevant. There are more individuals watching quietly than people making their positions public. The mob will chill when their friends ask them to post-apology. I have been on all sides of this phenomenon: the chiller, the chillee, the apology. It works.

The angry mob is the reason people like James Damore get fired while his openly white-male-hating coworkers are free to post their opinions on Twitter with no consequences at all. They are not at all irrelevant.

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

#997

Post by pluto9 » Fri, Jan 12, 2018, 10:41 PM UTC

petraeus wrote: post #881

thank you hacker news randoms for telling me what my opinion is on james danmore because with my finite and trivial amount of wisdom I cannot possibly be depended on to form my own thoughts of a classic white racist screaming about how oppressed white hetro males are in a social culture shaped by 1000 years of white dominance roll-eyes

a social culture shaped by 1000 years of white dominance

Every culture is shaped by the people it's comprised of by definition. Do you have a problem with the fact that Chinese culture is "shaped by 1000 years of Chinese dominance"?

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

#998

Post by _Tev » Fri, Jan 12, 2018, 11:28 PM UTC

thomasahle wrote: post #978

_Tev wrote: post #963

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You assume that "the lower average" group will apply as much (i.e. lower ability people will apply too) as the "higher average" group. I could now point "confused or insincere" right back at you ... But at least this whole debate is wonderful example why you should not assume bad faith in others.

Hm, you are saying one will get equal average skill/interest rates above the cut, if one includes that good people are more likely to apply? That sounds like an interesting argument. I don't think Damore made it, but if you will flesh it out a bit more, I'd be very interested in reading it.

Well Damore tried to make a lot arguments, I think his (main) fault wasn't in omitting some important ones.

And thanks, I'm thinking about making blog a lot, but I have no time.

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

#999

Post by jackvalentine » Sat, Jan 13, 2018, 10:54 AM UTC

stcredzero wrote: post #920

notfromhere wrote: post #901

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would disagree with that. Women still face plenty of discrimination in society

This is true. Asians face plenty of prejudicial discrimination as well. I would say that everyone faces some form of it. My mother always says, "Living well is the best revenge." After awhile, onlookers catch onto the fact one is spending all of their time moving the goalposts.

You’re a hundred percent right. Living well is the best revenge.

Short people, ugly people, fat people, disabled people... The list of discriminated against populations is practically endless and you can’t let it tear you up or drive you crazy if you’re one of them.

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

#1000

Post by mistermann » Sat, Jan 13, 2018, 7:01 PM UTC

ryguytilidie wrote: post #823

mistermann wrote: post #752

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 oth…

I wonder if you have any inkling of how you're demonstrating my point.