7 ms·

That's not what he said. He said on average women do not prefer the field, and optimizing to change that observable fact is a fool's errand. I don't have an op

That's not what he said. He said on average women do not prefer the field, and optimizing to change that observable fact is a fool's errand. I don't have an opinion on whether he's right or wrong but I don't think he shouldn't be able to make that argument...

smitty1e 6y ago
And the lady engineers should put out some great work in reply and refute him.
- Nitramp 6y ago
  That's not good. Imagine how you'd feel. Imagine people would generally claim that someone who looks like you is a bad engineer (say, someone with your hair color). And then imagine that people would expect you to constantly disprove that assumption, just because of your hair color. You'd be on the edge all the time. You'd never feel at home in the field. And whenever you interact with someone who doesn't have past work experience with you, they'd still assume you're a bad engineer.
  - Udik 6y ago
    But don't you think that the fairer the selection (blind to things such as gender, race or politics) the more confidence you'd have that you deserve to be in the position you are? How does a woman engineer should feel, knowing she was given a boost in the selection process by some kind of affirmative action? Isn't that in itself a source of uncertainty?
    - JoeSmithson 6y ago
      Have a lot of female programmers told you about the unfair advantages they feel they have in the field?
      - Udik 6y ago
        Not sure what you mean. All the female programmers I've come across had been hired without receiving any boost from an affirmative action program. Had I worked in a company that gave a score boost to candidates belonging to any group X, I could have the legitimate doubt that without the boost some of the people in the group X wouldn't have been hired. It's simply a necessary consequence of the affirmative action.
        JoeSmithson 6y ago
        Originally you were presenting an opposition which is based on a theoretical objection held _by women themselves_, one which you've now confirmed you've never actually seen. If you're going to advocate on people's behalf, limit it to concerns they've actually expressed themselves. You've now rephrased your objection that you would have a problem because you would assume female programmers were less qualified, which is not what you said in your original comment.
        Udik 6y ago
        I'm sorry, but I don't follow. - There is a score threshold you must cross to get a job; - score is normally representative of competence; - individuals belonging to group X get a score boost. It follows that it's possible for someone to cross the minimum threshold thanks to the boost given by their belonging to the favoured group, and not because of their competence alone. It's not a matter of "the point of view of the woman" or "my point of view". It's not a point of view. It's a logical consequence that can be inferred by women, men, everyone, equally.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - smitty1e 6y ago
    I can't understand how doing great work isn't a great thing. As the moderation bears witness, we live in an age where positive is somehow negative.
jashmatthews 6y ago
> Hiring practices which can effectively lower the bar for “diversity” candidates by decreasing the false negative rate Damore deliberately chose to cast doubt on whether the women Google hired were as good as the men. Otherwise, it's easier and less controversial to just argue that any form of discrimination is wrong.
- koheripbal 6y ago
  "cast doubt". That's a weasel word, because he said nothing of the sort.
- forgot_again 6y ago
  Given the existence of affirmative action policies in which gender gives a positive boost to some women and may compensate for some deficiency, technical or otherwise, that's a reasonable assumption to make.
- xiphias2 6y ago
  At Google casting doubt was a good in the early days. Even in search relevance of the results were the most important factor, even if it meant much less clicks, and the culture that Eric Schmidt created with the founders reflected that. Nowadays I think it's a better strategy at Google to not discuss if you don't agree with its policies. It's still a great workplace as long as you can discard politics.
  - jpdb 6y ago
    > It's still a great workplace as long as you can discard politics. There are large swathes of people who can't just "discard politics" because they are directly affected by the current political status quo.
    - free_rms 6y ago
      Sorry, but if you're talking about Googlers, that's bullshit, they're fine. 200k/yr, 300k/yr+ worth of fine. It's great to have empathy for people in a less fortunate position, and yes we have a lot of problems in our society, but FAANG software engineers are arguably the least oppressed people on the planet.
amelius 6y ago
> He said on average women do not prefer the field, and optimizing to change that observable fact is a fool's errand. Yes, it still leaves open whether the following is true: > when women do prefer the field, they tend to be amazing engineers Hence I'd say there is nothing wrong with the statement.
- badrabbit 6y ago
  Not just women but anyone. For any social group,the share of that group may never be at or close to their make up of the population. People come from an insanely diverse set of upbringing and social expectations. If they think 50% of engineers should be women, I would like to hold them to an even higher standard by requiring that out if that 50% of women,each national origin,ethnicity,political/ideological upbringing and social status (mother,single,divorced,etc...) is also proportionally represented. If this is about making up for historical prejudice then let every women of a wronged group be equally represented. You will soon see the silliness of the pursuit. It is the cause that needs policing and adjustment (upstream) not the effect.

smitty1e 6y ago

And the lady engineers should put out some great work in reply and refute him.

Nitramp 6y ago
That's not good. Imagine how you'd feel. Imagine people would generally claim that someone who looks like you is a bad engineer (say, someone with your hair color). And then imagine that people would expect you to constantly disprove that assumption, just because of your hair color. You'd be on the edge all the time. You'd never feel at home in the field. And whenever you interact with someone who doesn't have past work experience with you, they'd still assume you're a bad engineer.
- Udik 6y ago
  But don't you think that the fairer the selection (blind to things such as gender, race or politics) the more confidence you'd have that you deserve to be in the position you are? How does a woman engineer should feel, knowing she was given a boost in the selection process by some kind of affirmative action? Isn't that in itself a source of uncertainty?
  - JoeSmithson 6y ago
    Have a lot of female programmers told you about the unfair advantages they feel they have in the field?
    - Udik 6y ago
      Not sure what you mean. All the female programmers I've come across had been hired without receiving any boost from an affirmative action program. Had I worked in a company that gave a score boost to candidates belonging to any group X, I could have the legitimate doubt that without the boost some of the people in the group X wouldn't have been hired. It's simply a necessary consequence of the affirmative action.
      - JoeSmithson 6y ago
        Originally you were presenting an opposition which is based on a theoretical objection held _by women themselves_, one which you've now confirmed you've never actually seen. If you're going to advocate on people's behalf, limit it to concerns they've actually expressed themselves. You've now rephrased your objection that you would have a problem because you would assume female programmers were less qualified, which is not what you said in your original comment.
        Udik 6y ago
        I'm sorry, but I don't follow. - There is a score threshold you must cross to get a job; - score is normally representative of competence; - individuals belonging to group X get a score boost. It follows that it's possible for someone to cross the minimum threshold thanks to the boost given by their belonging to the favoured group, and not because of their competence alone. It's not a matter of "the point of view of the woman" or "my point of view". It's not a point of view. It's a logical consequence that can be inferred by women, men, everyone, equally.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- smitty1e 6y ago
  I can't understand how doing great work isn't a great thing. As the moderation bears witness, we live in an age where positive is somehow negative.

jashmatthews 6y ago

> Hiring practices which can effectively lower the bar for “diversity” candidates by decreasing the false negative rate Damore deliberately chose to cast doubt on whether the women Google hired were as good as the men. Otherwise, it's easier and less controversial to just argue that any form of discrimination is wrong.

koheripbal 6y ago
"cast doubt". That's a weasel word, because he said nothing of the sort.
forgot_again 6y ago
Given the existence of affirmative action policies in which gender gives a positive boost to some women and may compensate for some deficiency, technical or otherwise, that's a reasonable assumption to make.
xiphias2 6y ago
At Google casting doubt was a good in the early days. Even in search relevance of the results were the most important factor, even if it meant much less clicks, and the culture that Eric Schmidt created with the founders reflected that. Nowadays I think it's a better strategy at Google to not discuss if you don't agree with its policies. It's still a great workplace as long as you can discard politics.
- jpdb 6y ago
  > It's still a great workplace as long as you can discard politics. There are large swathes of people who can't just "discard politics" because they are directly affected by the current political status quo.
  - free_rms 6y ago
    Sorry, but if you're talking about Googlers, that's bullshit, they're fine. 200k/yr, 300k/yr+ worth of fine. It's great to have empathy for people in a less fortunate position, and yes we have a lot of problems in our society, but FAANG software engineers are arguably the least oppressed people on the planet.

amelius 6y ago

> He said on average women do not prefer the field, and optimizing to change that observable fact is a fool's errand. Yes, it still leaves open whether the following is true: > when women do prefer the field, they tend to be amazing engineers Hence I'd say there is nothing wrong with the statement.

badrabbit 6y ago
Not just women but anyone. For any social group,the share of that group may never be at or close to their make up of the population. People come from an insanely diverse set of upbringing and social expectations. If they think 50% of engineers should be women, I would like to hold them to an even higher standard by requiring that out if that 50% of women,each national origin,ethnicity,political/ideological upbringing and social status (mother,single,divorced,etc...) is also proportionally represented. If this is about making up for historical prejudice then let every women of a wronged group be equally represented. You will soon see the silliness of the pursuit. It is the cause that needs policing and adjustment (upstream) not the effect.