6 ms·

I haven't read the memo but I have read some summaries of it. Even before the memo was released I had a negative opinion of it. Not because someone spoke out th

I haven't read the memo but I have read some summaries of it. Even before the memo was released I had a negative opinion of it. Not because someone spoke out their mind but because someone decided to just go and shout out their obviously controversial beliefs to the world expecting for his ideas to be taken seriously and for there to be no negative consequences. If you want people to care about what you think and have to say, you need to spend time and effort cultivating a positive reputation. Otherwise you just seem like an unhinged idiot. edit: because people seem to be misunderstanding my point or simply downvoting me because I am describing a reality which makes them uncomfortable I will simply reference Douglas Crockford and the Nodevember debacle. If what occurred to Crockford occurred to some no name software engineer do you believe there would have been the outpouring of support and articles defending his character? No the person would have likely been fired for no good reason and had their name splashed across a bunch of tech blogs as a sexist.

Animats 9y ago
"Even before the memo was released I had a negative opinion of it." That's a problem. I read the whole thing and was annoyed that TechDirt cut the charts and the references.
- friedman23 9y ago
  No it's not a problem. I didn't have a negative opinion of it because of the content (which contained no new or interesting ideas by the way). I had a negative opinion of it because someone out there believed that you could just shout out your controversial beliefs in a group email and expect something positive to come from it.
  - ameister14 9y ago
    If you haven't read it you shouldn't critique its content.
    - friedman23 9y ago
      Well I just scanned it and can again confirm that there are no new ideas in that document.
  - adamrezich 9y ago
    >I had a negative opinion of it because someone out there believed that you could just shout out your controversial beliefs in a group email and expect something positive to come from it. I'm honestly struggling to understand your perspective. Would you prefer a world where nobody says anything "controversial", everyone just rolls with the status quo, and nothing ever changes? Why is espousing "controversial ideals" offensive to you? I treat ideas that clash with my own internal logical understanding of the world as challenges that can only improve my understanding of the world. If I run these "controversial ideas" through my logic and reasoning faculties, there's really only two possible outcomes: - I reject the idea and now have arguments against them that I can share with others - I end up embracing the idea because I realize that my implicit rejection of it lacked a sturdy logical foundation Either way, I win—I get a better understanding of the world I live in. Why would you choose to shield yourself from improving yourself mentally?
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]
beaner 9y ago
How do we know that he expected no negative consequences?
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
ll123 9y ago
You can't cultivate a positive reputation and express controversial beliefs
- friedman23 9y ago
  You aren't supposed to start with expressing controversial beliefs.
marklyon 9y ago
https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/3914586/Googles-Ideological-Echo-Chamber.pdf https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/3914586/Googles-I...
- georgyo 9y ago
  I just read it for the first time, it's actually much better written than I thought. I was prepared for it to be horrible, but he brings up some valid points. Some I don't agree with, but he is right that we have made it unacceptable to discuss this subject. I do encourage people to read it and make their own opinion, there are so many other opinions on this now, the only way to get back to reality is to read it for yourself.
jorgemf 9y ago
Other commenter here said he has a PhD in Biology from Harvard. I think it should give him some credit about what he said.
- gorbachev 9y ago
  If I had a PhD in Computer Science, and I write a 10-page manifesto about biology, should it instantly be believable too?
  - jorgemf 9y ago
    He wrote a manifesto giving some actual biology facts and he wasn't talking about CS but something more close to biology (or at least from the point of view of biology)
trcollinson 9y ago
I think you are making a number of poor logical leaps. I have read the memo in its entirety. I have begun the process of reading the citations in their entirety. I am, so far, entirely unconvinced of that he has proven his point about gender bias. I am entirely convinced that he did prove his entire point about the political and moral echo chamber that is Googles Mountain View office. Though he did not do it within the letter. Google helped him by firing him. Where you've made some poor logical leaps are: there is zero evidence that he shouted out his obviously controversial beliefs to the world. As far as I can tell this memo did not go to the whole world by his doing. It did not go to the entire Google staff by his doing. In fact, for all we know he was asked for his well thought out opinion on Googles diversity training and gave it to the appropriate people who did not respect the fact that he was giving his opinion to a small group and began forwarding it on. You might say I have no proof of this, and you'd be right. But you have no proof that he blasted this to the whole world. Additionally, he was a number of things in the memo but he was not an unhinged idiot. It reads like someone who was asked for his opinion on the training that was going on and whether there was value in making it mandatory. I have been asked in professional settings for my opinion on controversial matters. One time I was put into a very troubling position because of my opinion and many people were quite upset. It was uncomfortable for us all. I no longer give my opinion on controversial topics. I keep quiet and do my work and if I disagree with a policy or procedure I find new employment. I am sure the author of this memo has learned his lesson now. He will shut up. I hope that the world is a better place without his opinion.
- friedman23 9y ago
  Maybe you misinterpreted my statement as defending this person being silenced and fired but I was not. Frankly I have no strong opinions with regards to PC culture. It does not affect me and I see the injustice that comes from both sides. My statement was more intended to be advice, if you haven't cultivated a reputation/influence and you step out of line you will be mocked, ostracized, and perceived as an unhinged idiot. I believe the result of this debacle backs my point.
  - trcollinson 9y ago
wyclif 9y ago
1. He worked for Google. One could argue that he wouldn't have been hired in the first place without "cultivating a positive reputation." 2. He earned his PhD in Biology at Harvard University. What, in your opinion, should James Damore have additionally done to ensure that his thesis would be taken seriously?
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
- mjg59 9y ago
  Cited primary sources, linked his biological argument to his workplace argument with something other than handwaving, avoiding tying his scientific argument to a related but not equivalent political argument, taken into account evidence collected from women who've left the industry and ensured that his model accounted for that, and, uh, basically written an actual thesis? If I'd submitted work like this as an undergraduate I'd have got it back with a lot of red ink and a pretty terrible grade. (I work for Google and have a PhD in Biology from Cambridge University)
  - josteink 9y ago
    > Cited primary sources Please correct me if I'm wrong, but my impression was that he did cite sources, but that Gizmodo decided to remove them. In addition they also re-badged this internal email as a "manifesto" and presented it as a war-cry rather than a basis for discussion. Pretty dishonest changes really. These dishonest changes certainly helped further this shitstorm. Knowing Gizmodo (and their sister-website Jezebel which has no issues with domestic violence against men), I'm just going to assume this was the intended consequence.
    - mirimir 9y ago
      He cited some primary sources. And some Wikipedia pages. But I'm comfortable saying that he doesn't review the issues fully.
      - 9y ago

Animats 9y ago

"Even before the memo was released I had a negative opinion of it." That's a problem. I read the whole thing and was annoyed that TechDirt cut the charts and the references.

friedman23 9y ago
No it's not a problem. I didn't have a negative opinion of it because of the content (which contained no new or interesting ideas by the way). I had a negative opinion of it because someone out there believed that you could just shout out your controversial beliefs in a group email and expect something positive to come from it.
- ameister14 9y ago
  If you haven't read it you shouldn't critique its content.
  - friedman23 9y ago
    Well I just scanned it and can again confirm that there are no new ideas in that document.
- adamrezich 9y ago
  >I had a negative opinion of it because someone out there believed that you could just shout out your controversial beliefs in a group email and expect something positive to come from it. I'm honestly struggling to understand your perspective. Would you prefer a world where nobody says anything "controversial", everyone just rolls with the status quo, and nothing ever changes? Why is espousing "controversial ideals" offensive to you? I treat ideas that clash with my own internal logical understanding of the world as challenges that can only improve my understanding of the world. If I run these "controversial ideas" through my logic and reasoning faculties, there's really only two possible outcomes: - I reject the idea and now have arguments against them that I can share with others - I end up embracing the idea because I realize that my implicit rejection of it lacked a sturdy logical foundation Either way, I win—I get a better understanding of the world I live in. Why would you choose to shield yourself from improving yourself mentally?
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]

beaner 9y ago

How do we know that he expected no negative consequences?

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

ll123 9y ago

You can't cultivate a positive reputation and express controversial beliefs

friedman23 9y ago
You aren't supposed to start with expressing controversial beliefs.

marklyon 9y ago

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

georgyo 9y ago
I just read it for the first time, it's actually much better written than I thought. I was prepared for it to be horrible, but he brings up some valid points. Some I don't agree with, but he is right that we have made it unacceptable to discuss this subject. I do encourage people to read it and make their own opinion, there are so many other opinions on this now, the only way to get back to reality is to read it for yourself.

jorgemf 9y ago

Other commenter here said he has a PhD in Biology from Harvard. I think it should give him some credit about what he said.

gorbachev 9y ago
If I had a PhD in Computer Science, and I write a 10-page manifesto about biology, should it instantly be believable too?
- jorgemf 9y ago
  He wrote a manifesto giving some actual biology facts and he wasn't talking about CS but something more close to biology (or at least from the point of view of biology)

trcollinson 9y ago

I think you are making a number of poor logical leaps. I have read the memo in its entirety. I have begun the process of reading the citations in their entirety. I am, so far, entirely unconvinced of that he has proven his point about gender bias. I am entirely convinced that he did prove his entire point about the political and moral echo chamber that is Googles Mountain View office. Though he did not do it within the letter. Google helped him by firing him. Where you've made some poor logical leaps are: there is zero evidence that he shouted out his obviously controversial beliefs to the world. As far as I can tell this memo did not go to the whole world by his doing. It did not go to the entire Google staff by his doing. In fact, for all we know he was asked for his well thought out opinion on Googles diversity training and gave it to the appropriate people who did not respect the fact that he was giving his opinion to a small group and began forwarding it on. You might say I have no proof of this, and you'd be right. But you have no proof that he blasted this to the whole world. Additionally, he was a number of things in the memo but he was not an unhinged idiot. It reads like someone who was asked for his opinion on the training that was going on and whether there was value in making it mandatory. I have been asked in professional settings for my opinion on controversial matters. One time I was put into a very troubling position because of my opinion and many people were quite upset. It was uncomfortable for us all. I no longer give my opinion on controversial topics. I keep quiet and do my work and if I disagree with a policy or procedure I find new employment. I am sure the author of this memo has learned his lesson now. He will shut up. I hope that the world is a better place without his opinion.

friedman23 9y ago
Maybe you misinterpreted my statement as defending this person being silenced and fired but I was not. Frankly I have no strong opinions with regards to PC culture. It does not affect me and I see the injustice that comes from both sides. My statement was more intended to be advice, if you haven't cultivated a reputation/influence and you step out of line you will be mocked, ostracized, and perceived as an unhinged idiot. I believe the result of this debacle backs my point.
- trcollinson 9y ago

wyclif 9y ago

1. He worked for Google. One could argue that he wouldn't have been hired in the first place without "cultivating a positive reputation." 2. He earned his PhD in Biology at Harvard University. What, in your opinion, should James Damore have additionally done to ensure that his thesis would be taken seriously?

deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
mjg59 9y ago
Cited primary sources, linked his biological argument to his workplace argument with something other than handwaving, avoiding tying his scientific argument to a related but not equivalent political argument, taken into account evidence collected from women who've left the industry and ensured that his model accounted for that, and, uh, basically written an actual thesis? If I'd submitted work like this as an undergraduate I'd have got it back with a lot of red ink and a pretty terrible grade. (I work for Google and have a PhD in Biology from Cambridge University)
- josteink 9y ago
  > Cited primary sources Please correct me if I'm wrong, but my impression was that he did cite sources, but that Gizmodo decided to remove them. In addition they also re-badged this internal email as a "manifesto" and presented it as a war-cry rather than a basis for discussion. Pretty dishonest changes really. These dishonest changes certainly helped further this shitstorm. Knowing Gizmodo (and their sister-website Jezebel which has no issues with domestic violence against men), I'm just going to assume this was the intended consequence.
  - mirimir 9y ago
    He cited some primary sources. And some Wikipedia pages. But I'm comfortable saying that he doesn't review the issues fully.
    - 9y ago