7 ms·

> often taking an strong side in either extremes of the debate. His memo is very firmly left-wing and liberal though, hardly an 'extreme'.

sitkack 9y ago
It was basically the bell-curve of tech gender equality. To paraphrase > Autistic men have the fast-twitch OCD neurons that make them ideally suited for programming.
- sitkack 9y ago
  For reference, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Bell_Curve https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Bell_Curve and http://www.salon.com/2012/07/25/michael_johnsons_gold_medal_in_ignorance/ http://www.salon.com/2012/07/25/michael_johnsons_gold_medal_...
- jpttsn 9y ago
  Bet you paraphrased the Bell Curve, too.
  - sitkack 9y ago
    I'll let the Bell Curve speak for itself. The follow on comments by the authors are pure gold.
kuschku 9y ago
EDIT: I'll just post a bunch of quotes from the memo, and let you judge if that sounds left-wing. > the Left tends to deny science concerning biological differences between people (e.g., IQ and sex differences) > Stop alienating conservatives: Viewpoint diversity is arguably the most important type of diversity and political orientation is one of the most fundamental and significant ways in which people view things differently. > conservatives tend to be higher in conscientiousness, which is require for much of the drudgery and maintenance work characteristic of a mature company. > I would start by breaking down Googlegeist scores by political orientation > Google’s left bias has created a politically correct monoculture > which makes it clear why it’s a phenomenon of the Left and a tool of authoritarians > Considering that the overwhelming majority of the social sciences, media, and Google lean left, we should critically examine these prejudices > Google’s left leaning
- leifaffles 9y ago
  No he doesn't. Please read the memo.
  - kuschku 9y ago
    Yes he does. He argues that political diversity is most important > Viewpoint diversity is arguably the most important type of diversity and political orientation is one of the most fundamental and significant ways in which people view things differently. and that Google should change its hiring practices to improve this, instead of ethnical or national diversity. And he makes up more pseudo-scientific arguments for why Google should hire more conservatives: > conservatives tend to be higher in conscientiousness, which is require for much of the drudgery and maintenance work characteristic of a mature company. In the context of his memo - where he states that Google is too far left-wing - the recommended changes are obvious: Hire more conservative. He also recommends to track the political affiliation of all existing employees to track the diversity gap there: > I would start by breaking down Googlegeist scores by political orientation This is the same kind of affirmative action that he criticizes just a few paragraphs before.
    - WatchDog 9y ago
      Is it affirmative action if they are hiring with the belief that they the hiring decision they are making will best improve the performance of the company? If you have evidence that diversity has a positive impact on company performance and you have two candidates who other otherwise exact equals except one is a woman/conservative. Is it affirmative action to choose the under represented option? I don't think it's affirmative action rather its just good business sense. I consider affirmative action to be the hiring of a group who is perceived to be discriminated against, simply because of that discrimination.
      - kuschku 9y ago
        We could look at the legal definition of affirmative action that German courts considered illegal: Affirmative Action, or illegal discrimination, is given when a company bases its hiring decisions in any way on anything but the employees merit. If age/gender/race/political beliefs/religious beliefs/etc have any influence on the hiring decision, it is illegal discrimination. And he argues similarly, that affirmative action in any way is bad, and Google shouldn't do it - then he argues again that Google should do it, but only for the benefit of conservatives.
jimjimjim 9y ago
What are you smoking
ue_ 9y ago
A left-wing liberal wouldn't describe themselves as a 'conservative'. What are his positions on the State, extraction of surplus value, capital accumulation and democratic management of organisations that makes you so sure he or his manifesto is left wing?
- jackmodern 9y ago
  Why is what he wrote a manifesto? It reads more like a research paper to me?
  - sporkenfang 9y ago
    Research papers cite scientific sources, sorry. Out of curiosity I've read the document being discussed here and clicked a random sample of the links and none of them I clicked led to peer-reviewed science (though a couple are Go links and a lot are Wikipedia). The tone of the language is nice, but the Wikipedia citations remind me of my time teaching high school five years ago. Anyone who wrote a paper without citing in a significant way five scientific sources (google scholar provides free pdfs, how awesome is that?) got an automatic zero. Wikipedia has good information but it's hardly what one would want backing themselves up for something like this.

sitkack 9y ago

It was basically the bell-curve of tech gender equality. To paraphrase > Autistic men have the fast-twitch OCD neurons that make them ideally suited for programming.

sitkack 9y ago
For reference, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Bell_Curve https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Bell_Curve and http://www.salon.com/2012/07/25/michael_johnsons_gold_medal_in_ignorance/ http://www.salon.com/2012/07/25/michael_johnsons_gold_medal_...
jpttsn 9y ago
Bet you paraphrased the Bell Curve, too.
- sitkack 9y ago
  I'll let the Bell Curve speak for itself. The follow on comments by the authors are pure gold.

kuschku 9y ago

EDIT: I'll just post a bunch of quotes from the memo, and let you judge if that sounds left-wing. > the Left tends to deny science concerning biological differences between people (e.g., IQ and sex differences) > Stop alienating conservatives: Viewpoint diversity is arguably the most important type of diversity and political orientation is one of the most fundamental and significant ways in which people view things differently. > conservatives tend to be higher in conscientiousness, which is require for much of the drudgery and maintenance work characteristic of a mature company. > I would start by breaking down Googlegeist scores by political orientation > Google’s left bias has created a politically correct monoculture > which makes it clear why it’s a phenomenon of the Left and a tool of authoritarians > Considering that the overwhelming majority of the social sciences, media, and Google lean left, we should critically examine these prejudices > Google’s left leaning

leifaffles 9y ago
No he doesn't. Please read the memo.
- kuschku 9y ago
  Yes he does. He argues that political diversity is most important > Viewpoint diversity is arguably the most important type of diversity and political orientation is one of the most fundamental and significant ways in which people view things differently. and that Google should change its hiring practices to improve this, instead of ethnical or national diversity. And he makes up more pseudo-scientific arguments for why Google should hire more conservatives: > conservatives tend to be higher in conscientiousness, which is require for much of the drudgery and maintenance work characteristic of a mature company. In the context of his memo - where he states that Google is too far left-wing - the recommended changes are obvious: Hire more conservative. He also recommends to track the political affiliation of all existing employees to track the diversity gap there: > I would start by breaking down Googlegeist scores by political orientation This is the same kind of affirmative action that he criticizes just a few paragraphs before.
  - WatchDog 9y ago
    Is it affirmative action if they are hiring with the belief that they the hiring decision they are making will best improve the performance of the company? If you have evidence that diversity has a positive impact on company performance and you have two candidates who other otherwise exact equals except one is a woman/conservative. Is it affirmative action to choose the under represented option? I don't think it's affirmative action rather its just good business sense. I consider affirmative action to be the hiring of a group who is perceived to be discriminated against, simply because of that discrimination.
    - kuschku 9y ago
      We could look at the legal definition of affirmative action that German courts considered illegal: Affirmative Action, or illegal discrimination, is given when a company bases its hiring decisions in any way on anything but the employees merit. If age/gender/race/political beliefs/religious beliefs/etc have any influence on the hiring decision, it is illegal discrimination. And he argues similarly, that affirmative action in any way is bad, and Google shouldn't do it - then he argues again that Google should do it, but only for the benefit of conservatives.

jimjimjim 9y ago

What are you smoking

ue_ 9y ago

A left-wing liberal wouldn't describe themselves as a 'conservative'. What are his positions on the State, extraction of surplus value, capital accumulation and democratic management of organisations that makes you so sure he or his manifesto is left wing?

jackmodern 9y ago
Why is what he wrote a manifesto? It reads more like a research paper to me?
- sporkenfang 9y ago
  Research papers cite scientific sources, sorry. Out of curiosity I've read the document being discussed here and clicked a random sample of the links and none of them I clicked led to peer-reviewed science (though a couple are Go links and a lot are Wikipedia). The tone of the language is nice, but the Wikipedia citations remind me of my time teaching high school five years ago. Anyone who wrote a paper without citing in a significant way five scientific sources (google scholar provides free pdfs, how awesome is that?) got an automatic zero. Wikipedia has good information but it's hardly what one would want backing themselves up for something like this.