Google Engineer Fired

[The Green Barbarian]

[JLives]

Why are right wingers unable to make a point without blogs and YouTube videos? Speak for yourself. Share your own views. Nobody is watching these videos aside from other right wingers.

[Omnitheo]

Some low level engineer broke company policy with a manifesto that does not represent his company. They had every right to fire him. If you post crap about your company on your Facebook and your boss sees it, they can fire you. It's not censorship. It's business. Just think of how many people during the the recent elections these same right wingers were demanding to be fired simply for things that were said online, either recently or years prior.

[Glacier]

No one is saying Google didn't have the right to fire him. They are private company so they can do as they please.

Basically, this guy has watched too many Jonathan Haidt TED Talks. He was intrigued about Haidt's notion of diversity of thought, so he penned a memo for his colleagues to provide feedback on. He did it because he wanted to be proven wrong, but instead, someone took it and put on Reddit where it no longer became an internal memo, and of course, Google had to fire him because public image is number 1.

He's already been interviewed by Jordan Peterson, Stefan Molyneaux, and many others. He's got lots of job offers, so no personal harm has really come of this.

[Omnitheo]

Ah yes, he wrote it to be proven wrong. Classic.

[The Green Barbarian]

No one is saying Google didn't have the right to fire him. They are private company so they can do as they please.

Basically, this guy has watched too many Jonathan Haidt TED Talks. He was intrigued about Haidt's notion of diversity of thought, so he penned a memo for his colleagues to provide feedback on. He did it because he wanted to be proven wrong, but instead, someone took it and put on Reddit where it no longer became an internal memo, and of course, Google had to fire him because public image is number 1.

He's already been interviewed by Jordan Peterson, Stefan Molyneaux, and many others. He's got lots of job offers, so no personal harm has really come of this.

Google is actually a public company. But that's beside the point.

[The Green Barbarian]

Surprise surprise, fake news CNN totally misrepresents the reality of what actually happened, and what the guy actually said. Total lies. "I don't want women around computers". Just ridiculous.

[The Green Barbarian]

Here's a "right wing" video, the Young Turks. Just kidding, they are left of Stalin. And even THEY say that he had some good points in his memo. I realize people here don't want their confirmation biases challenged and only want to watch stuff that is approved by their personal echo chambers, but at least watch this one.

[fvkasm2x]

I've read the memo in full.

It's one of those things that reminds me of a conspiracy theorist.

One or two of the things he says are true... but then he loses all credibility by saying crazy things.

Long story short:

Affirmative action and/or hiring people based on gender, religion, ethnicity, etc... to meet a quota is ridiculous. Hire the best for the job, no matter what.

That part he got right.

Almost every other thing he said was ridiculous, offensive or just not true... so the original point loses all credibility and he sounds like an idiot.

[Glacier]

Ah yes, he wrote it to be proven wrong. Classic.

That's what he said. I believe him. That's why I post half the stuff I post on Castanet... okay, maybe not half, but certainly this thread. I started with one article and waited for another viewpoint. In response to me posting about the media lying, I was expecting someone to show me why they aren't lying, but instead you justified their lying by lying as well. If you think he's a racist, support your views. If you think he's a sexist, support your views.

I have not read the memo, so I'm neither for it or against it. I do not know his political views beyond he's against affirmative action.

All I'm asking is for someone to tell me what he got wrong. Additionally, did the media lie?

[fvkasm2x]

All I'm asking is for someone to tell me what he got wrong. Additionally, did the media lie?

What he got right:

1. Hiring people to fill a quota for diversity is wrong. Racist or sexist hiring practices to combat sexism or racism is in itself racist/sexist and doesn't equate to hiring the best and most intelligent people for the job.

2. Hiring people who only view things one way, doesn't promote diversity, open thinking or create idea generation.

3. Gender gaps aren't necessarily sexist

4. Google has practices in place that nurture/help women and minorities, but not white men, which actually creates more of a gap between the groups.

What he got wrong or what he said that NOBODY IN THEIR RIGHT MIND SHOULD SAY in a company email:

1. He essentially said women are ill suited for tech jobs.

2. Something about women acting like men... I didn't really understand what he was getting at.

3. Women aren't good leaders

4. Women are more prone to anxiety and neurotic behavior

5. Liberals are inherently biased (they are, but so are republicans and most people in the world, regardless of ideology)

6. Women like people, men like things so men are better with tech stuff

7. Women want more from life, like friends, children, etc... while men focus more on work and money



So as I said... naturally, people are just going to focus on the outrageous claims he makes about women (and minorities, but it was mostly targeting women) and just roll with that. You can't just crap all over 50% of the population and expect people to say "Oh, but he had some good comments too."

As for the media, they can't sell stories if they don't sensationalize it a bit. Not necessarily lie, but focus only on the outrageous claims and insults. Cherry pick the story

[Glacier]

Here's an interesting article from the Globe and Mail.

No, the Google manifesto isn’t sexist or anti-diversity. It’s science

By now, most of us have heard about Google's so-called "anti-diversity" manifesto and how James Damore, the engineer who wrote it, has been fired from his job.

Titled Google's Ideological Echo Chamber, Mr. Damore called out the current PC culture, saying the gender gap in Google's diversity was not due to discrimination, but inherent differences in what men and women find interesting. Danielle Brown, Google's newly appointed vice-president for diversity, integrity and governance, accused the memo of advancing "incorrect assumptions about gender," and Mr. Damore confirmed last night he was fired for "perpetuating gender stereotypes."

Despite how it's been portrayed, the memo was fair and factually accurate. Scientific studies have confirmed sex differences in the brain that lead to differences in our interests and behaviour.

https://beta.theglobeandmail.com/opinio ... dmail.com&

[The Green Barbarian]

Four scientists have claimed that James Damore’s Google manifesto is scientifically accurate, as reported by Quillette.
Responding to the viewpoint diversity manifesto, which called for more ideological diversity in Google’s workplace and pointed out not only the biological differences between men and women but also how these can apply to work, the four scientists deemed the ten-page document to be scientifically accurate.

“The author of the Google essay on issues related to diversity gets nearly all of the science and its implications exactly right,” declared Rutgers University Professor Lee Jussim. “Its main points are that: 1. Neither the left nor the right gets diversity completely right; 2. The social science evidence on implicit and explicit bias has been wildly oversold and is far weaker than most people seem to realize; 3. Google has, perhaps unintentionally, created an authoritarian atmosphere that has stifled discussion of these issues by stigmatizing anyone who disagrees as a bigot and instituted authoritarian policies of reverse discrimination; 4. The policies and atmosphere systematically ignore biological, cognitive, educational, and social science research on the nature and sources of individual and group differences.”

“I cannot speak to the atmosphere at Google, but: 1. Give that the author gets everything else right, I am pretty confident he is right about that too; 2. It is a painfully familiar atmosphere, one that is a lot like academia,” he continued.

This view was mirrored by Professor David P. Schmitt.

“I think it’s really important to discuss this topic scientifically, keeping an open mind and using informed skepticism when evaluating claims about evidence,” Schmitt proclaimed in the article. “In the case of personality traits, evidence that men and women may have different average levels of certain traits is rather strong.”

University of New Mexico Professor Geoffrey Miller also agreed, claiming that critics of the manifesto “ignored the memo’s evidence-based arguments.”

“Among commentators who claim the memo’s empirical facts are wrong, I haven’t read a single one who understands sexual selection theory, animal behavior, and sex differences research,” he continued. “For what it’s worth, I think that almost all of the Google memo’s empirical claims are scientifically accurate. Moreover, they are stated quite carefully and dispassionately. Its key claims about sex differences are especially well-supported by large volumes of research across species, cultures, and history.”

Debra W. Soh, Ph.D., a Canadian science writer, also deemed the manifesto to be scientifically accurate, declaring, “As a woman who’s worked in academia and within STEM, I didn’t find the memo offensive or sexist in the least.”

“I found it to be a well thought out document, asking for greater tolerance for differences in opinion, and treating people as individuals instead of based on group membership,” Soh explained. “Within the field of neuroscience, sex differences between women and men—when it comes to brain structure and function and associated differences in personality and occupational preferences—are understood to be true, because the evidence for them (thousands of studies) is strong. This is not information that’s considered controversial or up for debate; if you tried to argue otherwise, or for purely social influences, you’d be laughed at.”

Google employee James Damore, who authored the manifesto, has since been fired from Google, with the company claiming he had advanced “harmful gender stereotypes in our workplace.”

Read the full article at Quillette.

[Omnitheo]

Former Google engineer James Damore, who was fired for distributing a memo suggesting women are not biologically suited for certain types of work, is now branding himself as a brave truth teller. In what appears to be his new Twitter account, Damore can be seen wearing a shirt with the word “Goolag,” a play on “Google” that means to suggest the Silicon Valley search company is something like the infamous Soviet camps where prisoners were worked and starved to death as part of one of the 20th century’s worst genocides.

Google, which provides free meals, massages, and fitness classes at its Mountain View, California headquarters, pays engineers like Damore a typical salary of $162,000, according to Glassdoor, not including extra compensation like healthcare benefits, retirement savings, and equity. The company also offers its employees training opportunities, including volunteer sessions on subjects like diversity and unconscious bias.

You know, just like a Gulag.

-Vox

Millennials amirite

[The Green Barbarian]