No? Who here said anything even close to “this guy should be physically destroyed/harmed/killed etc?”
The firing isn’t necessarily punitive, as much as preservative in terms of the working conditions for everyone ELSE.
Perhaps, but it is certainly demonstrative to the rest of the workforce (who unfortunately still have to pay taxes unlike the company…).
I wonder if that will lead to people being more afraid to speak up on other subject or on programs, thus leading to less possible innovation - and perhaps others will feel that they can speak up, so offsetting it… is the gain of one idea worth removing another though - we will never know.
Speaking up saying your company should discriminate against a protected class is a really bad idea regardless of how well sourced your essay is or is not.
Rubbish. The reason by psychologists come up with these traits and measure them is precisely because they can be used to predict behavior. What on earth do you think non-clinical psychology is all about? Of course you can’t know for certain how an individual will react, but do these traits influence probabilities, yes. No one, much less the author of the memo is arguing otherwise.
Nobody ever talks about effect size in these things. Even when there are meaningful differences in the distributions, do they even matter? Most of the time, the variance within a gender is an order of magnitude bigger than any of the measured differences I’ve seen.
We all remember when hysteria was a scientific fact… for women right? Mental Health science is not concrete by the way. There is a big move now to do 10 year kind of studies on Depression, a medical diagnosis with science behind it, one where the treatment can be successful less than 50% of the time but affects in the ballpark of 1 in 5, not all women by the way.
What a goddurn minute. Was?
Well it’s still a thing but not these:
Pretty sure if some physician prescribed a vibrator today, all the science in the world and memos would not get the GOP to agree to cover it.
Oh and science was also used to justify slavery.
“A diverse mix of voices leads to better discussions, decisions, and outcomes for everyone.”
-Sundar Pichai, CEO, Google"
This quote is the lead quote on https://www.google.com/diversity/index.html.
It sure seems to me that Google is taking a broad view of diversity. Even if I didn’t properly decode the dog whistle, it is hard to blame Damore or myself for thinking that Google was taking a broader view of diversity than X% of woman, Y% of minorities (counting Asian-Americans as white of course) and Z% of differently abled people.
Anyone at the company should consider that line of reasoning to be ridiculous. If trying to get Chinese customers is worthwhile, then it’s worthwhile even if the goals are lofty.
Actually, I think it is incumbent of on employees to say. “Hey we’ve have been trying to get Chinese customer for 10 years we still only have single digit percentage, and the trend is flat or down, customer acquisition cost is 3x American customers so they aren’t profitable. The money we are spending on trying to expand in China is costing us American customers” If we don’t do something we maybe out of business soon.,
This thread is the best.
“We should have a place to laugh at idiot far-left numpties! Ha, ha!”
“Yeah, PETA is super dumb, look at this!”
“Haha, what a bunch of idiots.”
“So this idiot at Google was like 'women are hysterical lol, why would anyone hire them to be engineers?”
“Haha, what an idiot.”
“Wait, but what if he has a point? Have you ever, like, looked at an ovary, man?”
“LOL, you’re serious?”
“Yeah look at this study that says [extremely soft finding that doesn’t have much of anything to do at all with the topic at hand]”
“LOL, you’re serious?”
“Hey we shouldn’t physically destroy people for saying these things!”
“LOL, you’re serious?”
“You didn’t read the study!”
“LOL, you’re serious?”
[…]
Yeah, I’m pretty comfortable being on the side of this “debate” I’m on.
If I want examples of liberal stupidity QT3 is not someplace I’d go. National Review has plenty of example of liberal stupidity in between the Trump bashing articles.
On the other hand, I think P&R is valuable for debating things like the Google memo.
Wait I know we all went round and round about comparing his argument to a racist one, but now we’ve decided he actually was racist too? What did I miss?
I found this to be a great read. And extra points for using “ladysplain” in the title.
His science focuses on gender but he speaks of gender and race repeatedly throughout the entire memo. You’d think he’d only focus on gender based on his use of science but he didn’t stop there.
Thanks for posting that. Without having read the memo, pretty much what I suspected would be wrong with it was described in the Vox writeup…
Google has some PR problems.
That article makes the argument for Google’s diversity program. That women haven’t won the Code Jam is something they’re trying to fix.
Unless you are suggesting that women can’t win the Code Jam because their brains aren’t wired for it or something.
I don’t quite get the leap of logic you’re making here. Those goal of those diversity programs is hiring more women and minorities as engineers to Google. The Code Jam is a programming competition where none of the competitors is employed by Google. What’s the connection?
Clearly you believe there’s some form of unfair discrimination going on that’s caused these results. Would you care to propose some specific mechanism as the explanation?
How about this:
The reason that women haven’t won the Code Jam is that women are less likely to learn computer science.
The reason women are less likely to learn computer science is that there are not enough women role models in computer science.
By hiring more women, Google could create more role models.
This may inspire more women to work in computer science.
This may lead to more women winning a Code Jam.