4 ms·

These cowards don't link to the original: https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/3914586/Googles-Ideological-Echo-Chamber.pdf https://assets.documentcloud.o

These cowards don't link to the original: https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/3914586/Googles-Ideological-Echo-Chamber.pdf https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/3914586/Googles-I... Instead, they link to the heavily edited Gizmodo hit piece, that has the sources removed. Dishonest

quuquuquu 9y ago
Thank you for this. I agree that they are cowards. Damore is completely right, certain members of our society are shaming others into silence for supposed psychological safety. I also feel that money and political power are on the line too, which just heightens the needs for shaming others into silence, in their minds. Let's see what happens to our posts. EDIT: also Damore was attacked non-stop during his interview with Siliconbeat if I remember correctly.
- funkythingss 9y ago
  I'm honestly not in the position to judge whether his sources were correct or not. If you read the memo and listen to him (e.g. on the Rubin Report) however you realise he doesn't want to hurt anybody, not even close. He is an extremely intelligent, introverted guy. But I don't care about it being right or wrong. Google wanted all opinions to be on the table (in theory). Damore is just the latest example of someone (usually a little right wing) to get in trouble for his political opinions. I don't want this shit to come to Europe, I want to be able to have political discussions with my colleagues. Speaking up for anyone who is unjustly attacked, no matter what political affiliation, is all we can do. I firmly believe Silicon Valley will eat itself. Silicon Valley is so big, because it cared about results, not diversity. Shifting their attention to diversity will increasingly bug investors and/or hurt profits so bad, that the next big tech hub will arise.
  - dvfjsdhgfv 9y ago
    It's already arrived to Europe anyway. There is one mainstream view regarding (1) how to solve the immigration crisis, (2) whether or not different cultures and religions are equal, (3) whether or not a nation has the right to make a decision about its future. If you don't agree about any of these, you're quickly denounced as alt-right, Nazi etc. In extreme cases, you can lose a job. It's not happening frequently though as people are not stupid and learned to keep a low profile. You can discuss things in a more open way with your friends, but you better avoid any online discussions if you can be identified, no matter how reasonable your argument is.
StevePerkins 9y ago
Looking at the poster's history, I imagine this was "laziness" rather than "cowardice". For an example of cowardice, take note when this thread is almost certainly flagged and buried within the next hour or two.
- aaron-lebo 9y ago
  That's such an unfair way to paint your opposition. This is how Damore does "evidence" and proves sources: De-emphasize empathy - I’ve heard several calls for increased empathy on diversity issues. While I strongly support trying to understand how and why people think the way they do, relying on affective empathy—feeling another’s pain—causes us to focus on anecdotes, favor individuals similar to us, and harbor other irrational and dangerous biases[0]. Being emotionally unengaged helps us better reason about the facts. Right because Damore is so objective and the people he is trying to engage are emotional cripples. Here's his "source" for that: https://bostonreview.net/forum/paul-bloom-against-empathy https://bostonreview.net/forum/paul-bloom-against-empathy This is not what objective research looks like.
  - StevePerkins 9y ago
    I'm not sure if you're addressing me, OP, Damore, or just yelling into the aether. I certainly haven't said anything TO address regarding the content of Damore's original paper. For the record, I found Damore's reasoning to be terribly flawed. However, I happen to also believe that squashing all public discussion in its wake is foolish, cowardly, and entirely counterproductive from a practical standpoint. If you're afraid to pull bad reasoning out in the open and cleanse it with the sunshine of better reasoning, then it just festers and grows in the shadows.
    - aaron-lebo 9y ago
      My point is that downvoting and flagging a dead horse based off of a months old discussion isn't evidence of cowardice. Maybe there's just not much useful there?

quuquuquu 9y ago

Thank you for this. I agree that they are cowards. Damore is completely right, certain members of our society are shaming others into silence for supposed psychological safety. I also feel that money and political power are on the line too, which just heightens the needs for shaming others into silence, in their minds. Let's see what happens to our posts. EDIT: also Damore was attacked non-stop during his interview with Siliconbeat if I remember correctly.

funkythingss 9y ago
I'm honestly not in the position to judge whether his sources were correct or not. If you read the memo and listen to him (e.g. on the Rubin Report) however you realise he doesn't want to hurt anybody, not even close. He is an extremely intelligent, introverted guy. But I don't care about it being right or wrong. Google wanted all opinions to be on the table (in theory). Damore is just the latest example of someone (usually a little right wing) to get in trouble for his political opinions. I don't want this shit to come to Europe, I want to be able to have political discussions with my colleagues. Speaking up for anyone who is unjustly attacked, no matter what political affiliation, is all we can do. I firmly believe Silicon Valley will eat itself. Silicon Valley is so big, because it cared about results, not diversity. Shifting their attention to diversity will increasingly bug investors and/or hurt profits so bad, that the next big tech hub will arise.
- dvfjsdhgfv 9y ago
  It's already arrived to Europe anyway. There is one mainstream view regarding (1) how to solve the immigration crisis, (2) whether or not different cultures and religions are equal, (3) whether or not a nation has the right to make a decision about its future. If you don't agree about any of these, you're quickly denounced as alt-right, Nazi etc. In extreme cases, you can lose a job. It's not happening frequently though as people are not stupid and learned to keep a low profile. You can discuss things in a more open way with your friends, but you better avoid any online discussions if you can be identified, no matter how reasonable your argument is.

StevePerkins 9y ago

Looking at the poster's history, I imagine this was "laziness" rather than "cowardice". For an example of cowardice, take note when this thread is almost certainly flagged and buried within the next hour or two.

aaron-lebo 9y ago
That's such an unfair way to paint your opposition. This is how Damore does "evidence" and proves sources: De-emphasize empathy - I’ve heard several calls for increased empathy on diversity issues. While I strongly support trying to understand how and why people think the way they do, relying on affective empathy—feeling another’s pain—causes us to focus on anecdotes, favor individuals similar to us, and harbor other irrational and dangerous biases[0]. Being emotionally unengaged helps us better reason about the facts. Right because Damore is so objective and the people he is trying to engage are emotional cripples. Here's his "source" for that: https://bostonreview.net/forum/paul-bloom-against-empathy https://bostonreview.net/forum/paul-bloom-against-empathy This is not what objective research looks like.
- StevePerkins 9y ago
  I'm not sure if you're addressing me, OP, Damore, or just yelling into the aether. I certainly haven't said anything TO address regarding the content of Damore's original paper. For the record, I found Damore's reasoning to be terribly flawed. However, I happen to also believe that squashing all public discussion in its wake is foolish, cowardly, and entirely counterproductive from a practical standpoint. If you're afraid to pull bad reasoning out in the open and cleanse it with the sunshine of better reasoning, then it just festers and grows in the shadows.
  - aaron-lebo 9y ago
    My point is that downvoting and flagging a dead horse based off of a months old discussion isn't evidence of cowardice. Maybe there's just not much useful there?