Google employee fired 4 objections to PC culture Inquisition

[mo matik]

If your takeaway from this is to argue about whether or not he should've been fired, you're missing the point. That question is largely a distraction.

Read his memo in full:

https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/3914586/Googles-Ideological-Echo-Chamber.pdf




This guy fully bought into Google and the culture there. He was in the top 2% of performers in his position. It's always the true believers you have to worry most about.

 

[yeah]

If your takeaway from this is to argue about whether or not he should've been fired, you're missing the point. That question is largely a distraction.

Read his memo in full:

https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/3914586/Googles-Ideological-Echo-Chamber.pdf




This guy fully bought into Google and the culture there. He was in the top 2% of performers in his position. It's always the true believers you have to worry most about.

Then what's the point? Our constantly changing expectations when it comes to gender and the roles we assign to them?

The concepts that he wrote about in that "research" paper are nothing new. They are simply rehashes of the same stereotypes that have been pushed onto political groups and/or women for decades. "Liberals want to help the poor, Republicans want the poor to help themselves!" "Women are emotional, they should be in positions where empathy and emotions are rewarded," "women aren't in leadership positions because they leave to have kids/aren't driven to compete like men".

These theories have been argued time and time again. We don't have to pay special attention just because someone who worked at Google said/wrote it

 

[ninjahood]

to dismiss it though when its time to implement methods that, and seeing those methods failing, is a sign that, da means can't be ignored to achieve da goal.

 

[hand2handking]

i see homeboy touring da speaking circuit, and a cable news contributiorship in his future.

in other words being rewarded for his ignorance

 

[heatpinoyboy]

Idunno what homie was thinking when he put it out there...even left his email and everything for everyone to see lol

 

[equality]

He may have planned this out. Research labor laws -> get fired -> get compensated -> live life

 

[Methodical Management]

hyperbole is an accepted form of writing b, relax.

If you say "I'm so hungry, I could eat a horse," that's hyperbole. If someone replies by saying "how are you so hungry, you literally just ate lunch five minutes ago," it makes little sense to wave that away by saying "hyperbole, b."

You may have exaggerated the extent of the memo's citations for rhetorical effect, but the underlying point is that you were - somehow - impressed by the use of 11 citations in 10 pages.

You felt that the memo's conclusions were abundantly supported by the literature. That is the rhetorical purpose of your hyperbole - and it's ridiculous.

The memo is cited like a child's book report. Apparently you found that impressive and praiseworthy.

who's talking jokes? this been established that women are emotional argumentive creatures.

http://www.medicaldaily.com/study-w...gative-emotions-react-differently-mens-354226

jokes...i wish

Oh, it's been established?! One study featuring small n, nonrandom sample now constitutes "scientific fact?"

There's a lot to unpack here, but let's just start with the basics: you would do well to actually learn from Damore's mistakes and avoid using limited studies to draw sweeping conclusions that are not necessarily (or likely) shared by the study's authors.

While they might argue that there are small, but observable differences between the results of the two population groups included in their study, it would be inaccurate and wildly irresponsible of them to claim, from this, that "women are emotional, argumentative creatures." The data, even if taken at full face value as representative of the global population now and forever, do not suggest that ALL men are universally "rational." That's a gender stereotype that you're imposing on the results. With a study like this, you're looking at variations and distributions, not "the female brain converts stimuli into feelings, the male brain converts stimuli into cunning and brawn."

As is so often explained to you, correlation does not equal causation.

Let's create three hypothetical studies to demonstrate.


For our first study, we're going to take on the rather shocking finding that sperm counts have declined 50% in 40 years. Ready? Great, let's save the world from becoming Children of Men. Our hypothetical study will consist of human beings, randomly selected, regardless of age, gender, race, or any other consideration. Each participant will be asked to contribute a sperm sample. If they are unable to produce a sample, their sperm count will be considered zero.

You're not going to believe this, but we've found a correlation between height and sperm count!
There's also a correlation between income and sperm count.
These are statistically significant. We ran a multiple regression in SPSS and everything!

At this point, you might be thinking, "men are, on average, taller than women and children, all of whom would be unable to provide a sperm sample. You haven't actually proven that height or income matters at all."

Congratulations, you are now more of a a critical thinker than you were when you read your Montreal brain study. This is what's known as "omitted variable bias."


Unfortunately, we're not done solving the world's problems through brave, pioneering scientific research. Let's now design a study that attempts to prove Damore's point about women's negotiation skills and how biological differences, not prejudice, leads to salary disparities.

For this study, we're going to use a sophisticated full body scanner, of the sort deployed at airports for security screening. We've learned from our mistakes last time, and now we're going to precisely tailor our study to only include men and women currently employed in the tech sector. The men in our sample make more on average than their female counterparts, so we're going to use our fancy, scientific equipment to determine what's happening when they interview and negotiate for raises.

While underneath the scanner, participants will be asked a series of questions, requiring them to advocate for a raise or promotion. We're going to look at the scanner closely to see if we can observe innate, biological differences between the men and women.

Guess what? We did it! Our results are definitive, too. It's every researcher's dream. Our amazing scanning technology detected a significant biological variation between men and women.

I'll let the study's lead author explain.

You'll see him on the lecture circuit soon, I'm sure.

What? You have a problem with this study, too? We asked the participants to perform the same task, and we observed a significant difference under our scanner. Men and women have different salaries. Men and women have biological differences. Therefore, men and women have different salaries because men and women have biological differences. That's logical isn't it?

Actually, it isn't. Your conclusion is that men and women have different salaries because men and women are different. That's not a compelling explanation. To tack on "and, because these differences were observed while they were making a case for a raise or promotion, we can conclude that these differences influence the effectiveness of each gender's negotiation skills" only adds insult to ignorance.


For our final study, we're going to switch gears and look at racial bias. By now, most people should be familiar with the Implicit Association Test (IAT), so I'll spare you the introduction.
Like Kenneth Clark's famous "doll study," the IAT demonstrates that respondents can internalize negative stereotypes about their own group. However, not everyone is equally biased - and there are group differences. (Here's one recent example: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...hey-dont-even-know-it/?utm_term=.ee915e7f7bce )

We know that fear is an emotional response, and fear factors in heavily to officer involved shootings, or "stand your ground" cases. Let's say, for the sake of argument, that we study brain activity among respondents taking an IAT - or a form of police training where trainees are shown footage of suspects in uncertain situations and told to evaluate the threat and react with a replica service weapon. From previous IAT studies, it would not be a leap to see a small, but statistically significant, difference in fear responses demonstrated by White participants.

Would it be fair, then, to say that White people are genetically "more fearful" than everyone else? That White people are consequently less rational and more emotional?

It's a fallacy to suggest that, because the brain is "natural", any variation in response must be innate. Using such a study to draw the conclusion that White people are somehow genetically inferior would be wildly reckless and irresponsible.


That, however, is what Damore and his ilk seem to think about women from their specious understanding of a select few studies.


Suffice it to say, "but I found a study...." doesn't mean you get to make sexist comments on our forums. If I find a study that correlates education with voter preferences (e.g. http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/education-not-income-predicted-who-would-vote-for-trump/), that doesn't mean I get to call you stupid.

We expect, and require, everyone to treat each other with respect. Your comments about women were not respectful, and, as I think the above examples illustrate, they're not well supported, either.

and since meth is here opining, why don't we use Niketalk as a test case.

this place is da quintessential boys club, irrespective of da fact that this place lauds da principles of diversity and openiness and its co-founder is a walking talking billboard of progressive thought.

Men & Women tend to self select their interests/careers. this has huge ramifications in terms of their future earning potential of all things.

what's being sadly loss in da whole fiasco is a cold clinical analytical look into why these methods of trying to diversify either aren't working as planned or are being detrimental to other aspects of a environment takes a backseat to da emotional response and termination to pacify and placate da backlash as a result of da critiques of said policies.

That affirmative action or other diversity initiatives have not yet resolved all our social ills does not mean that such efforts are, in concept, worthless or counterproductive. It could mean that they haven't worked yet, that they have increased diversity, but still have a way to go, that they are insufficient in and of themselves and must be supplemented, or that they are not well implemented.

You've failed to make the case that we'd have greater progress today without these measures in place.


As for NikeTalk, if our audience appears to be predominantly male, that could be true for a wide variety of reasons (none of which includes "brain differences.") When we started the site in 1999, use of the Internet was skewed towards males. Times have obviously changed. The products discussed here have been, and remain, marketed towards males more frequently than females. Most "collectible" sneakers discussed here are made in men's sizes. If it's your argument that this represents "self-selection," and that women don't use NikeTalk because they choose not to use NikeTalk, fine.

That's hardly the only factor, but I would much rather that be the case than for women to avoid NikeTalk because it's a toxic, sexist environment.

Our goal is to ensure that our site is as welcoming as possible for sneaker fans regardless of gender. "Women as a whole appear less interested in this website" should not be taken as an excuse to make this website hostile to women.

That's not even a diversity outreach initiative. That's basic decency.


If even that is too much for you, may I suggest that it's you, and not women, who are in the wrong place.

 

[yeah]

Meth came through with that ether

 

[sfc415]

OP keeps trying to imply that women are not meant for math and science, when a huge number of doctors, accountants, financial analysts, etc. are women He's completely missing the truth about the tech culture being biased against women and is commenting as if he's an expert on an industry in a state he's never even been to

I live in the Bay Area/Silicon Valley. I can tell you firsthand that there are MANY women who excel in math and science fields. In fact, that's what sexist dudes out here complain about regarding the Bay Area's demographics (Too many smart women and not enough "sexy" women). I've seen firsthand how men constantly complain about women being "b___s" for being a little tough on them, while male bosses get complimented for being "effective leaders" (which is why many qualified women get looked over for leadership positions)

 

[ninjahood]

You may have exaggerated the extent of the memo's citations for rhetorical effect, but the underlying point is that you were - somehow - impressed by the use of 11 citations in 10 pages.

da guy wrote a 11 page essay with proper citations, for da intended internal dissemination of ~ 3 people max who weren't his supervisors, but mere colleagues yeah hyperbole was appropriately applied there.

That affirmative action or other diversity initiatives have not yet resolved all our social ills does not mean that such efforts are, in concept, worthless or counterproductive. It could mean that they haven't worked yet, that they have increased diversity, but still have a way to go, that they are insufficient in and of themselves and must be supplemented, or that they are not well implemented.

You've failed to make the case that we'd have greater progress today without these measures in place.

when those measures were implemented da idea was to keep as a temporary measure as eventually phase em out as social groups became more at parity with each other, hence why some of da voting laws have been repealed and now Asian Americans of all people have become da spear tip that is attacking da current legislation due to its quota system punitively and adversely harming their ranks regardless of da fact that they're over achieving.

http://www.wnyc.org/story/identifyi...rmative-action-hazing-and-question-belonging/

this NPR segment goes into da slow boil Asians are feeling as Democratic policies (for whom they're voting for) are not alligning to their self interests in regards to college enrollment.

http://www.wnyc.org/story/diversity-silicon-valley/

da callers push back enshrines da clear problems. here on this segment.

and..

Over half of Google employees polled say the web giant shouldn't have fired the engineer behind the controversial memo

• Julie Bort
  
• Aug. 9, 2017, 9:03 PM
• 26,574

Business Insider / Jillian D'Onfro

Former Google engineer James Damore's memo on diversity generated lots of controversy.

So too, as it turns out, has the web giant's subsequent decision to fire him.

Employees across Silicon Valley are deeply divided about Google's move, according to a survey conducted on Tuesday and Wednesday by Blind, an anonymous corporate chat app. When Blind asked its users if they thought Google should have fired Damore, over 4,000 from different companies weighed in.

Perhaps most pertinently, 441 Google employees responded. Of them, more than half - 56% to be precise- said they didn't think it was right for the company to fire Damore.

The former engineer actually had significant support among all the corporations represented in the survey. But it did vary from company to company.



At Uber, 64% of employees who participated in the survey thought Google shouldn't have fired Damore. Employees at Apple and LinkedIn were nearly evenly split in the poll but leaned slightly toward approving Google's decision. Meanwhile, 65% of respondents from Lyft were good with the way it went down.

Blind poll fired engineer Blind

Damore lost his job Monday after a firestorm erupted over the weekend when his memo went viral. In it, Damore accused Google of a left-wing bias, questioned the effectiveness of its diversity programs, and suggested that biology, not just sexism, may contribute to the lack of women in tech and leadership roles.

Google CEO Sundar Pichai called the memo "not OK."

During an interview with a far-right YouTube personality on Tuesday, Damore stood by his memo.

"I've gotten a ton of personal messages of support, which has been really nice," he said. "I got that at Google before all of this leaked. Lots of upper management was shaming me."

Damore has already filed a formal complaint with the National Labor Relations Board, claiming his rights were violated.

The divisions over Damore highlighted by Blind's poll reflect those in the Valley at large. Some in the tech industry support the basic premises he laid out in his memo. Others don't agree with his ideas but believe he shouldn't have lost his job for expressing them.

The controversy over Damore's memo and firing follows what had been a growing movement to counter sexism in the tech industry. Several high profile cases of sexual harassment have come to light recently in the Valley. Meanwhile, Google is facing a lawsuit by the Department of Labor that alleges it underpaid female employees.

http://www.businessinsider.com/many...nk-james-damore-should-have-been-fired-2017-8

da masses at silicone valley don't agree at all with da firing, seems google dropped da ball and created a lil ideological problem for themselves.

 

[ninjahood]

Times have obviously changed. The products discussed here have been, and remain, marketed towards males more frequently than females.

ehhhhhhhhh.... that's not really true, especially in this eye of da storm athleisure trend we're experiencing, on that factor alone this place should be at least be uptick in on da female interest based on Nike's courting and da segment exploding,

One reason Nike has had so much success courting both genders is the athletic look has increasingly become a fashionable style in both apparel and footwear. Retailers such as Foot Locker FL have taken note, touting apparel as a strong growth opportunity in their stores, as consumers increasingly want to look good both at the gym and after a workout.

A look at the most recent ad campaigns from athletic-gear makers signals how companies are valuing both function and style, almost equally. Under Armour UA earlier this year unveiled ad campaigns for model Gisele Bündchen, as well as an athlete, ballerina Misty Copeland. Gymnast McKayla Maroney has featured in stylish Adidas clothing too — not on a vault or beam, but outside in a park.

Though activewear makes up less than 20% of the total apparel market, sales for that segment have outperformed. The women’s activewear market totaled $15.1 billion in the 12 months that ended in August, up 10% from the same period in the prior year, according to research firm The NPD Group.

http://fortune.com/2014/10/22/nike-women-business/

yet here are, doesn't mean you did anything wrong..... interests and self selection is a real thing.

Our goal is to ensure that our site is as welcoming as possible for sneaker fans regardless of gender. "Women as a whole appear less interested in this website" should not be taken as an excuse to make this website hostile to women.

don't think da nerd wanted or intended to be "hostile" he merely wasn't convinced that da methods on which google was taking measures to be diverse was working.

once again, its like of a women's group came here and said this place is a sexist cesspool because instead of understanding how self selection interests can make this look non diverse in da aggregate and in a defacto way, they launch a generalized smear cuz they're offended by just da topical facts.

i wouldn't think that's fair at all, devoid of any context...i think da guy made a earnest effort to issue a substantive thought about da methods on a clinical way without factoring a emotional response, which i believe his flaw was, cuz some people emphasize emotion, passion but skim over da nuts & bolts about a situation.

 

[osh kosh bosh]

So let me get this straight.


1. Google (a company that uses peer review to help determine pay raises) is currently in a class action lawsuit for gender discrimination in pay.

2. This engineer after taking a some unconscious bias diversity seminar decides to post a memo that cherry pickss a handfull of studies to postie that women are biologically inferior when it comes to computer programming....


3. memo reaches the public; essentially handing the people suing them cold hard evidence that high level employees that are involved in peer reviews that help determine salaries believe that women biologically inferior to men...


4. Dude gets fired.




What about this is controversial?

What did this dude think would happen?

 

[Methodical Management]

So, you think you're doing something by arguing that:

1. A non-zero number of people who feel they're getting the short end of the stick under affirmative action policies oppose those same policies.

2. A non-zero number of people at a company currently under investigation for extreme wage disparities between men and women, and/or in an industry that is now notorious for the prevalence of toxic, misogynistic, frat house corporate cultures, indicated anonymously that they think firing an employee for a sexist memo was unwarranted.

3. Affirmative action policies, initially designed to be phased out when social groups achieved parity, have not yet been phased out... because said social groups have not yet achieved parity.

4. NikeTalk, which you'd criticized as a "test case" for how misguided diversity policies cause more harm than good has, on second thought, done nothing wrong, and its policies have harmed neither women nor men.

 

[Nawzlew]

Over half of Google employees polled say the web giant shouldn't have fired the engineer behind the controversial memo.

This isn't surprising at all. Living in the Bay Area, the amount of "bro culture" in the tech industry ...

 

[ninjahood]

So, you think you're doing something by arguing that:

im not doing nothing though, all i been doing is paraphrasing what ol' boy did, if u wanna include me in da dialogue to put a NT face on it to make it more compelling for our local audience as a villian foil then so be it

 

[heatpinoyboy]

This isn't surprising at all. Living in the Bay Area, the amount of "bro culture" in the tech industry ...

Right? the tech industry AS A WHOLE is still dominated by white men. that's fact. and 400+ employees at Google is a laughable number to extrapolate the consensus that half of google employees think duke shouldn't have gotten fired