6 ms·

It's just embarrassing at this point that an engineer at a well known company like Google even thinks like this. (The original author, not Yonatan.) Reading th

It's just embarrassing at this point that an engineer at a well known company like Google even thinks like this. (The original author, not Yonatan.) Reading the original manifesto felt like something my 17-year-old self would write. Too clever and completely oblivious at the same time.

Barrin92 9y ago
yep. Some other article looked into some comments made by googlers discussing this 'manifesto' and the supporter comments could have come straight from 4chan. Glad that a senior engineer speaks out about this. No company needs to tolerate troglodytes. I work in finance and when something even fractionally as frivolous as this would have been published you would find yourself out of employment five minutes later. I consider the unprofessional startup culture that some companies like Google explicitly fostered to be at least partially responsible.
TimTheTinker 9y ago
I understood the original manifesto's main argument to be against intentional, institutional discrimination (e.g. affirmative action) -- with many supporting points. I don't know what's shameful about that (unless you're referring to something else). He did seem to value gender equality in the sense that men and women should be valued and respected equally (unless I'm reading into it).
- interpol_p 9y ago
  Except for the fact that it implies that men are in higher, more well paid positions because of inherent biological traits. If you truly believe people are equal and deserving of equal treatment then you must see a society where white men are the most powerful, most privileged class, as a failure of society. The author cannot claim to believe in equality and then go on to justify inequality with biological traits.
  - H4CK3RM4N 9y ago
    But if the biological innate differences exist, why must they be disregarded?
  - searealist 9y ago
    The manifesto author is arguing for equality of opportunity. It's possible to have this and end up with different outcomes because of differing abilities or priorities. Also, Whites are _underrepresented_ in tech relative to their percentage of the population. edit: The parent edited their comment to remove the "white" qualifier from "men".
    - interpol_p 9y ago
      And women are much more severely underrepresented in tech. So why argue against fixing that? It will simply make the tech industry better.
      - smsm42 9y ago
        I don't think the original author argued against fixing it, I think he advocated different approach to fixing it, based on different understanding of what "it" is.
        interpol_p 9y ago
        By eliminating programs intended to help increase diversity, by "de-emphasising empathy" and by making Google more of a safe space for people with viewpoints similar to his own. Got it!
        smsm42 9y ago
        > By eliminating programs intended to help increase diversity The key words here are "intended to". There's a difference between doing something and intending to do something. Unfortunately, intending to do something is sometimes not enough to actually do something - you also have to do it in the right way, otherwise you might intend to do one thing and instead do another thing. > de-emphasising empathy Not the best sound-bite, which of course means it will get quoted a lot. Happens to techies, not all of them are good writers, yet less of them can write a text that would be robust under hostile interpretation. The point, however, was to use data instead of feel-good anecdotes. > making Google more of a safe space for people with viewpoints similar to his own What's wrong with making Google more safe for people working there?
hindsightbias 9y ago
I have this thing about reading footnotes first: "I consider myself a classical liberal and strongly value individualism and reason." I miss the days when libertarians weren't ashamed to admit so. But back then, they could debate the difference between von Mises and Hayek. Today... not so much. Ideology isn't Book Deep, it's Google Search Deep.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
- CalChris 9y ago
  There are no libertarian issues involved in this kerfuffle. This is a corporation, a free association of people, and an individual. If Google wants to shitcan the OP, von Mises is silent on the subject. The big bad state of CA is silent on the subject as well. And I don't think any classical liberals would find a kindred spirit in him regardless of how he labels himself. Also, he does say Stop alienating conservatives. So let's get that charade over with and just call him a conservative and dispense with any libertarian nonsense.
  - smsm42 9y ago
    Your presumption is that only a conservative can be against alienating conservatives, and a true libertarian would be OK with whatever is done to conservatives - after all, he's not one, so who cares about those people?
    - CalChris 9y ago
      You're kind've chasing your tail there. I wasn't aware that libertarians would be against alienating conservatives but then totally ok with alienating women because Hayek.
      - smsm42 9y ago
        > I wasn't aware that libertarians would be against alienating conservatives Because it's only not OK to alienate people who we agree with, but the idea of having civil discussion with people we disagree with... who needs that? Just call them names, chase them out and be done with it! Do you think this is the libertarian way? Where did you meet libertarians like these? > then totally ok with alienating women because Hayek. Err what? Who you are arguing with here? Nobody said it's "ok with alienating women" and Hayek has nothing to do with it. Could you please leave that strawman alone, he needs a well-deserved rest.
LyndsySimon 9y ago
> It's just embarrassing at this point that an engineer at a well known company like Google even thinks like this. (The original author, not Yonatan.) Is this not exactly the sort of reaction that the author is speaking against when he refers to "viewpoint diversity"?
- interpol_p 9y ago
  I'm sure the women who work with him love that his "viewpoint diversity" considers them to be more neurotic, less able to deal with stress, and less suited to the high demands of a senior Google engineering role than himself!
  - ukj 9y ago
    Not than himself. Than men. You understand how Gaussian distributions work, yes?
    - interpol_p 9y ago
      You and I are not reading the same manifesto. This guy clearly thinks less of the women he works with. There is no way he sees his female co-workers as equal while publishing rubbish like this. And I doubt women engineers at Google would read that and feel very pleased about it. Yeah I understand Gaussian distributions. I also understand the emotional tone of the original manifesto and the discriminatory thinking behind it disguised in its academic, reasonable, and rational voice.
      - MichaelGG 9y ago
        I think Asians are generally shorter than me. But if a 6'2 Asian is standing next to me, I don't think that particular person is shorter than me. It's perfectly reasonable for him to say the 50/50 ratio might not be ideal, and maybe biology plays a role, while still believing his colleagues are competent.
        9y ago
Aunche 9y ago
I'll admit that there are several problems with the Googler's manifesto. However, it's more embarrassing that the Medium writer chooses to attack a strawman instead of addressing the entire point of the manifesto in the first place.
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
Goladus 9y ago
No, Yonatan Zunger is the one who should be embarassed. He lies in his very first paragraph, setting up a straw man which is consistently relied upon throughout the piece. The original manifesto is thoughtful, articulate, thorough, and sincere. It provides a basis for dialog, discussion, and disagreement. Zunger's article is mostly a pile of fallacious rhetoric that by chance raises a few interesting ideas that could be twisted into a legitimate counter-argument to a couple of the manifesto's points if you tried really hard.

Barrin92 9y ago

yep. Some other article looked into some comments made by googlers discussing this 'manifesto' and the supporter comments could have come straight from 4chan. Glad that a senior engineer speaks out about this. No company needs to tolerate troglodytes. I work in finance and when something even fractionally as frivolous as this would have been published you would find yourself out of employment five minutes later. I consider the unprofessional startup culture that some companies like Google explicitly fostered to be at least partially responsible.

TimTheTinker 9y ago

I understood the original manifesto's main argument to be against intentional, institutional discrimination (e.g. affirmative action) -- with many supporting points. I don't know what's shameful about that (unless you're referring to something else). He did seem to value gender equality in the sense that men and women should be valued and respected equally (unless I'm reading into it).

interpol_p 9y ago
Except for the fact that it implies that men are in higher, more well paid positions because of inherent biological traits. If you truly believe people are equal and deserving of equal treatment then you must see a society where white men are the most powerful, most privileged class, as a failure of society. The author cannot claim to believe in equality and then go on to justify inequality with biological traits.
- H4CK3RM4N 9y ago
  But if the biological innate differences exist, why must they be disregarded?
- searealist 9y ago
  The manifesto author is arguing for equality of opportunity. It's possible to have this and end up with different outcomes because of differing abilities or priorities. Also, Whites are _underrepresented_ in tech relative to their percentage of the population. edit: The parent edited their comment to remove the "white" qualifier from "men".
  - interpol_p 9y ago
    And women are much more severely underrepresented in tech. So why argue against fixing that? It will simply make the tech industry better.
    - smsm42 9y ago
      I don't think the original author argued against fixing it, I think he advocated different approach to fixing it, based on different understanding of what "it" is.
      - interpol_p 9y ago
        By eliminating programs intended to help increase diversity, by "de-emphasising empathy" and by making Google more of a safe space for people with viewpoints similar to his own. Got it!
        smsm42 9y ago
        > By eliminating programs intended to help increase diversity The key words here are "intended to". There's a difference between doing something and intending to do something. Unfortunately, intending to do something is sometimes not enough to actually do something - you also have to do it in the right way, otherwise you might intend to do one thing and instead do another thing. > de-emphasising empathy Not the best sound-bite, which of course means it will get quoted a lot. Happens to techies, not all of them are good writers, yet less of them can write a text that would be robust under hostile interpretation. The point, however, was to use data instead of feel-good anecdotes. > making Google more of a safe space for people with viewpoints similar to his own What's wrong with making Google more safe for people working there?

hindsightbias 9y ago

I have this thing about reading footnotes first: "I consider myself a classical liberal and strongly value individualism and reason." I miss the days when libertarians weren't ashamed to admit so. But back then, they could debate the difference between von Mises and Hayek. Today... not so much. Ideology isn't Book Deep, it's Google Search Deep.

deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
CalChris 9y ago
There are no libertarian issues involved in this kerfuffle. This is a corporation, a free association of people, and an individual. If Google wants to shitcan the OP, von Mises is silent on the subject. The big bad state of CA is silent on the subject as well. And I don't think any classical liberals would find a kindred spirit in him regardless of how he labels himself. Also, he does say Stop alienating conservatives. So let's get that charade over with and just call him a conservative and dispense with any libertarian nonsense.
- smsm42 9y ago
  Your presumption is that only a conservative can be against alienating conservatives, and a true libertarian would be OK with whatever is done to conservatives - after all, he's not one, so who cares about those people?
  - CalChris 9y ago
    You're kind've chasing your tail there. I wasn't aware that libertarians would be against alienating conservatives but then totally ok with alienating women because Hayek.
    - smsm42 9y ago
      > I wasn't aware that libertarians would be against alienating conservatives Because it's only not OK to alienate people who we agree with, but the idea of having civil discussion with people we disagree with... who needs that? Just call them names, chase them out and be done with it! Do you think this is the libertarian way? Where did you meet libertarians like these? > then totally ok with alienating women because Hayek. Err what? Who you are arguing with here? Nobody said it's "ok with alienating women" and Hayek has nothing to do with it. Could you please leave that strawman alone, he needs a well-deserved rest.

LyndsySimon 9y ago

> It's just embarrassing at this point that an engineer at a well known company like Google even thinks like this. (The original author, not Yonatan.) Is this not exactly the sort of reaction that the author is speaking against when he refers to "viewpoint diversity"?

interpol_p 9y ago
I'm sure the women who work with him love that his "viewpoint diversity" considers them to be more neurotic, less able to deal with stress, and less suited to the high demands of a senior Google engineering role than himself!
- ukj 9y ago
  Not than himself. Than men. You understand how Gaussian distributions work, yes?
  - interpol_p 9y ago
    You and I are not reading the same manifesto. This guy clearly thinks less of the women he works with. There is no way he sees his female co-workers as equal while publishing rubbish like this. And I doubt women engineers at Google would read that and feel very pleased about it. Yeah I understand Gaussian distributions. I also understand the emotional tone of the original manifesto and the discriminatory thinking behind it disguised in its academic, reasonable, and rational voice.
    - MichaelGG 9y ago
      I think Asians are generally shorter than me. But if a 6'2 Asian is standing next to me, I don't think that particular person is shorter than me. It's perfectly reasonable for him to say the 50/50 ratio might not be ideal, and maybe biology plays a role, while still believing his colleagues are competent.
      - 9y ago

Aunche 9y ago

I'll admit that there are several problems with the Googler's manifesto. However, it's more embarrassing that the Medium writer chooses to attack a strawman instead of addressing the entire point of the manifesto in the first place.

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

Goladus 9y ago

No, Yonatan Zunger is the one who should be embarassed. He lies in his very first paragraph, setting up a straw man which is consistently relied upon throughout the piece. The original manifesto is thoughtful, articulate, thorough, and sincere. It provides a basis for dialog, discussion, and disagreement. Zunger's article is mostly a pile of fallacious rhetoric that by chance raises a few interesting ideas that could be twisted into a legitimate counter-argument to a couple of the manifesto's points if you tried really hard.