4 ms·

My feelings :-) Granted, that is not yet "some", only one, but with millions of white men on the planet, chances seem high others see it the same way. If you r

My feelings :-) Granted, that is not yet "some", only one, but with millions of white men on the planet, chances seem high others see it the same way. If you really want to nitpick, quantify my sentence with "in my opinion".

tomlock 10y ago
Absolute confirmation bias. I can't wait for your quantification of the life at google twitter.
- facepalm 10y ago
  Well I don't have that much time, so for now I only looked at pictures with people in them they have posted since December 1. Simply counting people yields 29% white women, 19% women of color, 21% men of color, 30% white men. Not a very exact science, though - I left out groups above a certain size (for example picture from Anti-Trump demonstration or MLKday), and in some cases I couldn't recognize the people. Many white men come from office shots where they linger in the background, whereas there are many tweets explicitly featuring female or black engineers. It seems by only looking at their "media timeline" I also missed photos like this one: https://twitter.com/Every28HoursPla/status/831666887717031936 https://twitter.com/Every28HoursPla/status/83166688771703193... (which they retweeted). I'll try to find time for a better "analysis", ideally including texts. Compared to last time there seem to be now more posts boasting technology at Google. For example there were several about Tensor Flow, all featuring the same white guy (I counted him for every instance). I couldn't find the time when I last posted about lifeatgoogle, would have liked to look at their tweets from around then. For comparison employee stats from 2014: http://mashable.com/2014/05/28/google-employee-demographics/#zdocqLkt78qJ http://mashable.com/2014/05/28/google-employee-demographics/... - 70% male, 91% white or asian.
  - tomlock 10y ago
    So what's your conclusion?
    - facepalm 10y ago
      This time around there were more white men, I think - in part because of some specials like Tensor Flow, or a picture from an actual office. It is still biased against white men (if it is supposed to reflect the actual distribution of Google employees), but not as extreme as last time. I really would like to find the date of my last comment about it. Also perhaps simply more data is needed - a single picture with several people could shift the results here, because I checked only pics from 2.5 months. Also better methodology needed, this was just a quick shot looking into one simple metric.
      - tomlock 10y ago
        You're again, falling victim to confirmation bias by rejecting the best quantification you've provided yet. Lets examine the data you've provided - 29% white women, 19% women of color, 21% men of color, 30% white men. This data is entirely in line with the demographics of the US. About 50/50 on gender and 60% white. In fact, given google's global hiring reach, these figures are actually biased towards white people - while about spot on for gender. This entirely contradicts the point you were originally pointing to this twitter feed as confirmation of.
        jaduncan 10y ago
        If anything, this thread has just made me newly impressed with Google's approach to inclusion. It's also really, really obvious that the person you are responding to isn't able to reconcile seeing PoC and women with their own world view.
        facepalm 10y ago
        Huh wtf - what does seeing women and PoCs have to do with a "world view"? You think I am not aware that women and PoCs exist?
        tomlock 10y ago
        Based on your quantification, there's now more evidence for the claim that you perceive an unbiased sample of people to be biased towards minorities and women, than there is evidence against that claim. It seems like you're struggling to reconcile this bias with the quantification of it.

tomlock 10y ago

Absolute confirmation bias. I can't wait for your quantification of the life at google twitter.

facepalm 10y ago
Well I don't have that much time, so for now I only looked at pictures with people in them they have posted since December 1. Simply counting people yields 29% white women, 19% women of color, 21% men of color, 30% white men. Not a very exact science, though - I left out groups above a certain size (for example picture from Anti-Trump demonstration or MLKday), and in some cases I couldn't recognize the people. Many white men come from office shots where they linger in the background, whereas there are many tweets explicitly featuring female or black engineers. It seems by only looking at their "media timeline" I also missed photos like this one: https://twitter.com/Every28HoursPla/status/831666887717031936 https://twitter.com/Every28HoursPla/status/83166688771703193... (which they retweeted). I'll try to find time for a better "analysis", ideally including texts. Compared to last time there seem to be now more posts boasting technology at Google. For example there were several about Tensor Flow, all featuring the same white guy (I counted him for every instance). I couldn't find the time when I last posted about lifeatgoogle, would have liked to look at their tweets from around then. For comparison employee stats from 2014: http://mashable.com/2014/05/28/google-employee-demographics/#zdocqLkt78qJ http://mashable.com/2014/05/28/google-employee-demographics/... - 70% male, 91% white or asian.
- tomlock 10y ago
  So what's your conclusion?
  - facepalm 10y ago
    This time around there were more white men, I think - in part because of some specials like Tensor Flow, or a picture from an actual office. It is still biased against white men (if it is supposed to reflect the actual distribution of Google employees), but not as extreme as last time. I really would like to find the date of my last comment about it. Also perhaps simply more data is needed - a single picture with several people could shift the results here, because I checked only pics from 2.5 months. Also better methodology needed, this was just a quick shot looking into one simple metric.
    - tomlock 10y ago
      You're again, falling victim to confirmation bias by rejecting the best quantification you've provided yet. Lets examine the data you've provided - 29% white women, 19% women of color, 21% men of color, 30% white men. This data is entirely in line with the demographics of the US. About 50/50 on gender and 60% white. In fact, given google's global hiring reach, these figures are actually biased towards white people - while about spot on for gender. This entirely contradicts the point you were originally pointing to this twitter feed as confirmation of.
      - jaduncan 10y ago
        If anything, this thread has just made me newly impressed with Google's approach to inclusion. It's also really, really obvious that the person you are responding to isn't able to reconcile seeing PoC and women with their own world view.
        facepalm 10y ago
        Huh wtf - what does seeing women and PoCs have to do with a "world view"? You think I am not aware that women and PoCs exist?
        tomlock 10y ago
        Based on your quantification, there's now more evidence for the claim that you perceive an unbiased sample of people to be biased towards minorities and women, than there is evidence against that claim. It seems like you're struggling to reconcile this bias with the quantification of it.