12 ms·

>Further evidence that Google and the other large institutions don't actually give a rat's ass about "diversity". There is a market force pushing software comp

by vl 9y ago

>Further evidence that Google and the other large institutions don't actually give a rat's ass about "diversity". There is a market force pushing software companies into leftist positions (since influential demographics in the industry are strongly pro-left; also this creates positive feedback loop). In this context Google’s behavior is rational, and this guy tried to fight it with reason and argument (I was laughing hard when I was reading the manifesto) and got steamrolled in the process, proving the argument made in his memo by personal example.

dublinclontarf 9y ago
> There is a market force pushing software companies into leftist positions Yes, if you oppose or even voice disagreement you lose your job. I expect Googles behaviour in this instance was illegal.
- revmoo 9y ago
  > I expect Googles behaviour in this instance was illegal. I very much doubt it. Companies can fire anyone for any reason as long as they're not part of a protected class. They made mistake firing him, though.
peoplewindow 9y ago
It's not market forces. It's the fact that they hire so many new grads. Lack of mental/political/ideological diversity in universities leads to lack of diversity inside Google too (and Facebook and ...)
lurker69 9y ago
This market force might actually change in future. In this case it seems that James planned all this to happen and is gonna sue Google: > "$1 million in bonuses" was changed to "$100 million as a compensation" after Damore was "fired" by a Mr Kunda Píča whom I have never heard of; Damore plans to sue Google; he had previously complained to NLRB and wants to argue that his dismissal was a revenge which would be illegal. See a Damore's defiant answer to Reuters. And about PR, while vocal left leaning activists might cheer decision to fire him, conservative and centrists media used this as great point to smear Google as leftist propaganda. This is great talking point for proving accusations that google manipulates search results to prefer certain political agenda. Recently Jordan Peterson caused quite a stir when his youtube and gmail accounts were revoked, YouTube decided it will start isolating videos with controversial views even if they dont brake ToS... This moves will be used by anti PC camp a lot to steer users to alternatives to googles products. Facebook and Twitter already pushed a lot of potential users away by similar behavior, alternative platforms are getting more and more relevant. Its hard to say if this vocal PC SJW activists are just vocal minority or actually majority talking with their wallets. Based on results of recent US elections and financial problems of some feminists and left leaning publications, and on majority of comments on uncensored pages; I would say that PC ship is probably sinking fast.
- CSMastermind 9y ago
  Jordan Peterson got his YouTube account revoked? What possible justification could have they given for that?
  - lurker69 9y ago
    No reason was given. Peterson tweeted about it. And said that even access to his gmail account was revoked for braking policy. He said no details were given. Then he tweeted that they reviewed revocation it and still didnt restore account. He then tweeted few influencers like Rubin, Rogan and Harris. And then he tweeted that his accounts were restored, again with no explanation. Right media and Youtube anti-SJWs blame this on one Youtube policy to isolate contradicting videos and authors, but I think this was probably mistake by some bot. Maybe Peterson account was mass flagged by some fringe group. You tube isnt doing themselves a favor with keeping all the details, since this allow those who accuse them of being biased, to use this as an example of censoring anti-SJW personalities.
bjourne 9y ago
> There is a market force pushing software companies into leftist positions (since influential demographics in the industry are strongly pro-left; also this creates positive feedback loop). That's bullshit. Write a "manifesto" about how senior executive compensations are to high, the company should be taken over by the employees and that private ownership of properties is a crime. That's the REAL leftist position. Then send that manifesto out to thousands of employees on the company's internal mailing list and see how long you last. People fail to see the point... Yes, there are many "leftist" positions. The above is one of them. The point is that expressing that position on an internal mailing list most certainly puts your employment in jeopardy. It doesn't matter what the position is (abortion, drug legalization, gay weddings, military attacks on civilians, foreign relations, ...), what matter is where you express it.
- sunir 9y ago
  Please. "No true Scotsman" is not even worth the time. It is a current left wing argument in the United States for "diversity".
  - pyvpx 9y ago
    which is odd, because diverse groups are more efficient. you'd think it'd be a hardcore capitalist argument.
    - mason240 9y ago
      Diversity of thought - of which google is now less of.
      - pyvpx 9y ago
        "I think half of this group should not be allowed in here because of their biology" is not a diverse thought, it's a dangerous one that doesn't need to be entertained yet again (Eugenics, etc etc)
        9y ago
livestyle 9y ago
Highly recommended reading on this subject by four scientists https://web.archive.org/web/20170808013732/http://quillette.com/2017/08/07/google-memo-four-scientists-respond/ https://web.archive.org/web/20170808013732/http://quillette....
- croon 9y ago
  Quotes from link: > But it is not clear to me how such sex differences are relevant to the Google workplace. And even if sex differences in negative emotionality were relevant to occupational performance (e.g., not being able to handle stressful assignments), the size of these negative emotion sex differences is not very large (typically, ranging between “small” to “moderate” in statistical effect size terminology; accounting for less than 10% of the variance). So, using someone’s biological sex to essentialize an entire group of people’s personality would be like operating with an axe. Not precise enough to do much good, probably will cause a lot of harm. > Again, though, most of these sex differences are moderate in size and in my view are unlikely to be all that relevant to the Google workplace (accounting for, perhaps, a few percentage points of the variability between men’s and women’s performances). Sex differences in occupational interests, personal values, and certain cognitive abilities are a bit larger in size (see here), but most psychological sex differences are only small to moderate in size, and rather than grouping men and women into dichotomous groups, I think sex and sex differences are best thought of scientifically as multidimensional dials, anyway. > 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. > Sex researchers recognize that these differences are not inherently supportive of sexism or stratifying opportunities based on sex. The problem in the employee's memo seems to be correlating scientific data (which is accurate) to groups of people (women) at Google and their qualifications (inaccurate).

by vl 9y ago

dublinclontarf 9y ago

> There is a market force pushing software companies into leftist positions Yes, if you oppose or even voice disagreement you lose your job. I expect Googles behaviour in this instance was illegal.

revmoo 9y ago
> I expect Googles behaviour in this instance was illegal. I very much doubt it. Companies can fire anyone for any reason as long as they're not part of a protected class. They made mistake firing him, though.

peoplewindow 9y ago

It's not market forces. It's the fact that they hire so many new grads. Lack of mental/political/ideological diversity in universities leads to lack of diversity inside Google too (and Facebook and ...)

lurker69 9y ago

This market force might actually change in future. In this case it seems that James planned all this to happen and is gonna sue Google: > "$1 million in bonuses" was changed to "$100 million as a compensation" after Damore was "fired" by a Mr Kunda Píča whom I have never heard of; Damore plans to sue Google; he had previously complained to NLRB and wants to argue that his dismissal was a revenge which would be illegal. See a Damore's defiant answer to Reuters. And about PR, while vocal left leaning activists might cheer decision to fire him, conservative and centrists media used this as great point to smear Google as leftist propaganda. This is great talking point for proving accusations that google manipulates search results to prefer certain political agenda. Recently Jordan Peterson caused quite a stir when his youtube and gmail accounts were revoked, YouTube decided it will start isolating videos with controversial views even if they dont brake ToS... This moves will be used by anti PC camp a lot to steer users to alternatives to googles products. Facebook and Twitter already pushed a lot of potential users away by similar behavior, alternative platforms are getting more and more relevant. Its hard to say if this vocal PC SJW activists are just vocal minority or actually majority talking with their wallets. Based on results of recent US elections and financial problems of some feminists and left leaning publications, and on majority of comments on uncensored pages; I would say that PC ship is probably sinking fast.

CSMastermind 9y ago
Jordan Peterson got his YouTube account revoked? What possible justification could have they given for that?
- lurker69 9y ago
  No reason was given. Peterson tweeted about it. And said that even access to his gmail account was revoked for braking policy. He said no details were given. Then he tweeted that they reviewed revocation it and still didnt restore account. He then tweeted few influencers like Rubin, Rogan and Harris. And then he tweeted that his accounts were restored, again with no explanation. Right media and Youtube anti-SJWs blame this on one Youtube policy to isolate contradicting videos and authors, but I think this was probably mistake by some bot. Maybe Peterson account was mass flagged by some fringe group. You tube isnt doing themselves a favor with keeping all the details, since this allow those who accuse them of being biased, to use this as an example of censoring anti-SJW personalities.

bjourne 9y ago

> There is a market force pushing software companies into leftist positions (since influential demographics in the industry are strongly pro-left; also this creates positive feedback loop). That's bullshit. Write a "manifesto" about how senior executive compensations are to high, the company should be taken over by the employees and that private ownership of properties is a crime. That's the REAL leftist position. Then send that manifesto out to thousands of employees on the company's internal mailing list and see how long you last. People fail to see the point... Yes, there are many "leftist" positions. The above is one of them. The point is that expressing that position on an internal mailing list most certainly puts your employment in jeopardy. It doesn't matter what the position is (abortion, drug legalization, gay weddings, military attacks on civilians, foreign relations, ...), what matter is where you express it.

sunir 9y ago
Please. "No true Scotsman" is not even worth the time. It is a current left wing argument in the United States for "diversity".
- pyvpx 9y ago
  which is odd, because diverse groups are more efficient. you'd think it'd be a hardcore capitalist argument.
  - mason240 9y ago
    Diversity of thought - of which google is now less of.
    - pyvpx 9y ago
      "I think half of this group should not be allowed in here because of their biology" is not a diverse thought, it's a dangerous one that doesn't need to be entertained yet again (Eugenics, etc etc)
      - 9y ago

livestyle 9y ago

Highly recommended reading on this subject by four scientists https://web.archive.org/web/20170808013732/http://quillette.com/2017/08/07/google-memo-four-scientists-respond/ https://web.archive.org/web/20170808013732/http://quillette....

croon 9y ago
Quotes from link: > But it is not clear to me how such sex differences are relevant to the Google workplace. And even if sex differences in negative emotionality were relevant to occupational performance (e.g., not being able to handle stressful assignments), the size of these negative emotion sex differences is not very large (typically, ranging between “small” to “moderate” in statistical effect size terminology; accounting for less than 10% of the variance). So, using someone’s biological sex to essentialize an entire group of people’s personality would be like operating with an axe. Not precise enough to do much good, probably will cause a lot of harm. > Again, though, most of these sex differences are moderate in size and in my view are unlikely to be all that relevant to the Google workplace (accounting for, perhaps, a few percentage points of the variability between men’s and women’s performances). Sex differences in occupational interests, personal values, and certain cognitive abilities are a bit larger in size (see here), but most psychological sex differences are only small to moderate in size, and rather than grouping men and women into dichotomous groups, I think sex and sex differences are best thought of scientifically as multidimensional dials, anyway. > 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. > Sex researchers recognize that these differences are not inherently supportive of sexism or stratifying opportunities based on sex. The problem in the employee's memo seems to be correlating scientific data (which is accurate) to groups of people (women) at Google and their qualifications (inaccurate).