4 ms·

Can you point to where he says any of what you claim? I have read that memo quite a few time and see no such claims anywhere.

skywhopper 9y ago
Here's a couple: Women on average show a higher interest in people and men in things We can make software engineering more people-oriented with pair programming and more collaboration. Unfortunately, there may be limits to how people- oriented certain roles at Google can be and we shouldn't deceive ourselves or students into thinking otherwise (some of our programs to get female students into coding might be doing this). Women on average are more cooperative [...but] Competitiveness and self reliance can be valuable traits and we shouldn't necessarily disadvantage those that have them
- depressedpanda 9y ago
  That doesn't at all prove your claim that he "basically asserted that women engineers didn't belong at Google".
- ThomPete 9y ago
  How does pointing out difference in interest and a pretty well-established fact that women on average are more cooperative by any metrics prove that he should have claimed that women do not belong on google? In fact, his point is that technology is not even for most men which he has made clear in other interviews.
  - 1024core 9y ago
    > a pretty well-established fact that women on average are more cooperative Please, establish it for us. Point us to studies (and counter-studies) which state this fact of yours.
    - stcredzero 9y ago
      Wikipedia has lots of links to studies. There is also an overview of Gender differences: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Five_personality_traits#Gender_differences https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Five_personality_traits#Ge... "The difference in neuroticism was the most prominent and consistent, with significant differences found in 49 of the 55 nations surveyed."
  - rayiner 9y ago
    The problem is the assumption that being cooperative is somehow a liability rather than a strength in a profession that's much more about cooperation than other engineering fields. (E.g. the trope that software is more complicated than an aircraft carrier because unlike in software, the toilet doesn't have modes of interaction with the steam launcher.)
    - ThomPete 9y ago
      Where does he claim it's a liability? As far as I remember I claim that this difference means that men and women generally make different choices. Can you point to where he says it's a liability?
      - rayiner 9y ago
        His ultimate conclusion is that biological differences explain, at least by enough to reconsider diversity efforts, the difference in self selection into programming. Given that conclusion, your reading is even less charitable than mine. Under that reading, he’s literally just throwing out an unrelated difference between men and women, then asserting that’s why men disproportionately choose programming. Classic: premise -> ??? -> conclusion. Reading his memo charitably, I think he’s assuming that cooperativeness contraindicates for programming preference, so at least he has a complete chain of reasoning, even if that assumption is wrong: Women -> cooperative; cooperative -/-> programming; women -/-> programming.
        ThomPete 9y ago
        Can you please be specific. Point to exact quotes, not your own interpretation of what he writes. That makes it easier to discuss.
- stcredzero 9y ago
  As it happens, this excerpt is borne out at all points by the research on the "Big 5" personality traits, which to date are the clearest results in psychology outside of the power of General Intelligence to affect life outcomes. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LfI4BEONsng https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LfI4BEONsng I would also note, that Google often seems to fall down in terms of taking into account how changes in software affect the people who are their users.

skywhopper 9y ago

Here's a couple: Women on average show a higher interest in people and men in things We can make software engineering more people-oriented with pair programming and more collaboration. Unfortunately, there may be limits to how people- oriented certain roles at Google can be and we shouldn't deceive ourselves or students into thinking otherwise (some of our programs to get female students into coding might be doing this). Women on average are more cooperative [...but] Competitiveness and self reliance can be valuable traits and we shouldn't necessarily disadvantage those that have them

depressedpanda 9y ago
That doesn't at all prove your claim that he "basically asserted that women engineers didn't belong at Google".
ThomPete 9y ago
How does pointing out difference in interest and a pretty well-established fact that women on average are more cooperative by any metrics prove that he should have claimed that women do not belong on google? In fact, his point is that technology is not even for most men which he has made clear in other interviews.
- 1024core 9y ago
  > a pretty well-established fact that women on average are more cooperative Please, establish it for us. Point us to studies (and counter-studies) which state this fact of yours.
  - stcredzero 9y ago
    Wikipedia has lots of links to studies. There is also an overview of Gender differences: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Five_personality_traits#Gender_differences https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Five_personality_traits#Ge... "The difference in neuroticism was the most prominent and consistent, with significant differences found in 49 of the 55 nations surveyed."
- rayiner 9y ago
  The problem is the assumption that being cooperative is somehow a liability rather than a strength in a profession that's much more about cooperation than other engineering fields. (E.g. the trope that software is more complicated than an aircraft carrier because unlike in software, the toilet doesn't have modes of interaction with the steam launcher.)
  - ThomPete 9y ago
    Where does he claim it's a liability? As far as I remember I claim that this difference means that men and women generally make different choices. Can you point to where he says it's a liability?
    - rayiner 9y ago
      His ultimate conclusion is that biological differences explain, at least by enough to reconsider diversity efforts, the difference in self selection into programming. Given that conclusion, your reading is even less charitable than mine. Under that reading, he’s literally just throwing out an unrelated difference between men and women, then asserting that’s why men disproportionately choose programming. Classic: premise -> ??? -> conclusion. Reading his memo charitably, I think he’s assuming that cooperativeness contraindicates for programming preference, so at least he has a complete chain of reasoning, even if that assumption is wrong: Women -> cooperative; cooperative -/-> programming; women -/-> programming.
      - ThomPete 9y ago
        Can you please be specific. Point to exact quotes, not your own interpretation of what he writes. That makes it easier to discuss.
stcredzero 9y ago
As it happens, this excerpt is borne out at all points by the research on the "Big 5" personality traits, which to date are the clearest results in psychology outside of the power of General Intelligence to affect life outcomes. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LfI4BEONsng https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LfI4BEONsng I would also note, that Google often seems to fall down in terms of taking into account how changes in software affect the people who are their users.