“Google’s Ideological Echo Chamber” memo goes viral, usual suspects outraged

suicide_circus

Think like me or get out, for I have the monopoly on truth.

Progressive is the new Conservative.

The King is dead. Long live the King.

FraR

BBC reporting that Google fired him.

FTA69

Biggest lickspittle on boardz wrote: »

Well this is a troubling development.
I did a little bit of digging, and it turns out Google has assembled a crack squad of the most extreme, mentally unstable, and highly irrational fanatics from the regressive left and is now working with them to 'fight online abuse'. (i.e. censor everyone they don't like).
We're talking intellectual midgets like Zoe Quinn, Anita Sarkeesian, and a host of other social justice warriors that you wouldn't leave your kids with.

Nothing to see here, folks. Just normal, rational, totally not radical elements having access to the largest information control platform on the planet. They totally won't abuse their position to push their politics onto users.

https://twitter.com/jigsawteam/status/646783722570682369?lang=en



Things are starting to make sense now. No wonder people are fed up.

And we're off. Why bother using intelligent counter argument when you can just throw out the "social justice warrior" bogeyman?

Hande hoche!

FraR wrote: »

BBC reporting that Google fired him.

He should get a job with Microsoft.

conorhal

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

Ahh, sez who?

I don't know American employment law, but in Ireland the things you cannot discriminate on are listed below (source). Ethical beliefs, political beliefs and political party membership are not included. This means they are fair game: employers CAN discriminate based on these.

As for saying that people should just leave their beliefs at the door and do their job. Huh? Maybe it works if you're a network engineer or similar technical role. But if you're any kind of manager or in a role with any kind of soft decisions, then it's not possible. Hell ... even if you're a network engineer, unconscious bias can affect what you do - eg if you have an underlying belief that first-language English speakers are better at their jobs, you'll likely take less notice of questions raised by non-native English speakers, even if those questions are the very issues you're supposed to fix.


What you cannot discriminate on in Ireland:

• Gender: this means man, woman or transsexual
• Civil status: includes single, married, separated, divorced, widowed people, civil partners and former civil partners
• Family status: this refers to the parent of a person under 18 years or the resident primary carer or parent of a person with a disability
• Sexual orientation: includes gay, lesbian, bisexual and heterosexual
• Religion: means religious belief, background, outlook or none
• Age: this does not apply to a person aged under 16
• Disability: includes people with physical, intellectual, learning, cognitive or emotional disabilities and a range of medical conditions
• Race: includes race, skin colour, nationality or ethnic origin
• Membership of the Traveller community.

"Are you now, or have you ever been, a member of the Communist Party?"


It seems that the only thing that the left ever learned from McCarthyism was how best to silence and de-platform your ideological opponents and ringfence their purse puppies like protected species.

BrokenArrows

Requiring gender equality in the IT sector is stupid and unrealistic.

Women do not have the same natural desire or talent to be involved in IT, thats not saying that some are very talented and the best in their IT field but the majority have no interest in it.

So desiring an equal number of men and women to be working in the same roles for the same money is impossible.

Speaking from my first hand experience most women who work in IT roles are sub-par to their male colleagues who have the same experience but at the same time i work with 2 women who are far better than me or any of the other guys.

You dont see anyone complaining that Nursing is dominated by Women and there should be gender equality in that field!!

Gender pay gap is bull****. Everyone is offered a job and a salary. If a women accepts the salary they are offered then that is their problem. If they dont negotiate then thats their failure.

Brian?

Biggest lickspittle on boardz wrote: »

Diversity is meant to involve everyone, including those that you don't like.
Freezing out conservatives because you dislike them is pathetic, dangerous, and discrimination.

Conservatives tend to freeze themselves out, because diversity is an anti-Conservative idea.

Should they be allowed have their voices heard? Absolutely. But the idea that their ideas are given equal weight is actually anti Conservative and anti liberal at the same time.

Ubbquittious

Google are hard at work replacing everyone with robots and these petty squabbles about gender are just a distraction from the fact that in a few years Google will have very few human employees and just a few lads like Eric Schmidt at the top raking in billions a day in profit.

strandroad

FraR wrote: »

BBC reporting that Google fired him.

It feels harsh, why not to let him be whatever he thinks.

Until you put your corporate hat on. He's made himself impossible to put on teams, people will refuse to work with him if he made it clear he sees them or other colleagues as inferior before they even open their mouths. And you can't make them: if he publicly expressed prejudice it would be an open & shut bullying case if you forced anyone to work with him, even more so if he is in any kind of decision making roles.

He's turned himself into a legal liability from a staffing perspective which he must have been aware of, especially if he was anyone above a foot soldier. My guess is that he was on his way out anyway and wanted to go out with a bang? He might have some plans where he actually needs the notoriety.

silverharp

Brian? wrote: »

Conservatives tend to freeze themselves out, because diversity is an anti-Conservative idea.

What does that mean , forced diversity and quotas is an anti-conservative idea, Conservatives are more interested in a quality of the individual not what group they "belong" too

red ears

Only 18 percent of IT graduates in the US are female. Are we going to have a situation where they get 50 percent of the jobs at Google. How is that going to be fair on the 82 percent of men studying the subject. Will we have the same 50 percent hiring policy for teachers, nurses, speech therapists etc.

Manach

Stefan Molyneux has an insightful take on this, link.

As for the firing the employee instead of engaging with his points underpins the very nature of the cult of liberal diversity that is not open to heretic arguments based on logic but instead attempts to rely on the tried and true "point and shriek" method of dealing with dissent. Google is the company that the majority of the world's data and news flow through: thus at the very least a political neutral work environment should be key to allow different view points and avoid bias, not instead one seeming based on a Gender studies curriculum.

silverharp

red ears wrote: »

Only 18 percent of IT graduates in the US are female. Are we going to have a situation where they get 50 percent of the jobs at Google. How is that going to be fair on the 82 percent of men studying the subject. Will we have the same 50 percent hiring policy for teachers, nurses, speech therapists etc.

I remember hearing about a hedge fund that shorts companies with excessive diversity programs, if half of google's IT specialists end up being female this hedge fund might add google to their list

Brian?

silverharp wrote: »

What does that mean , forced diversity and quotas is an anti-conservative idea, Conservatives are more interested in a quality of the individual not what group they "belong" too

Exactly

wes

silverharp wrote: »

I remember hearing about a hedge fund that shorts companies with excessive diversity programs, if half of google's IT specialists end up being female this hedge fund might add google to their list

Hedge funds are great at making cash for there managers, not so much there customers.

Brian?

silverharp wrote: »

I remember hearing about a hedge fund that shorts companies with excessive diversity programs, if half of google's IT specialists end up being female this hedge fund might add google to their list

Sounds like a brilliant way to lose money.

silverharp

Brian? wrote: »

Exactly

you implied conservatives are against diversity which is incorrect

Brian?

silverharp wrote: »

you implied conservatives are against diversity which is incorrect

You just agreed they were !?!

silverharp

wes wrote: »

Hedge funds are great at making cash for there managers, not so much there customers.

who knows but one can see the reasoning, if a company goes out of its way not to hire or promote the best staff, the competition are likely to overtake at some stage

silverharp

Brian? wrote: »

You just agreed they were !?!

I said forced as in if a company sacks or doesn't promote or hire male staff to advance women.

Brian?

silverharp wrote: »

I said forced as in if a company sacks or doesn't promote or hire male staff to advance women.

No, you didn't say that. You said they were against forced diversity quotas.

silverharp

Brian? wrote: »

No, you didn't say that. You said they were against forced diversity quotas.

that's what I said

forced diversity and quotas

wes

silverharp wrote: »

who knows but one can see the reasoning, if a company goes out of its way not to hire or promote the best staff, the competition are likely to overtake at some stage

Just pointing out that hedge funds don't really have a clue, and Googles reasoning is that having different people in the room, can avoid problems. Here is an admittedly extreme example from HP:

HP Face-Tracking Webcams Don't Recognize Black People


Google is world wide, and having capable people from different back grounds would be an asset for them.

Also, in the past there use to be a lot more Women involved in computing, but then something happened to change that:

Computer Programming Used To Be Women’s Work


Take a look at people like people like Grace Hopper etc from the early days of programming. A lot of Women were involved and that changed later for some reason. We have to ask what the hell happened?

brevity

There are 3 .net developers on my team that are women are are all very good. One is excellent.

By and large its a male heavy role but it doesn't necessarily mean there aren't good women engineers out there.

Depends on the person.

Biggest lickspittle on boardz

Well Google responded to a discussion on diversity by straight up hunting the guy down and firing him.

Keep this up and Trump will get reelected without any problems.

silverharp

wes wrote: »

Just pointing out that hedge funds don't really have a clue, and Googles reasoning is that having different people in the room, can avoid problems. Here is an admittedly extreme example from HP:

HP Face-Tracking Webcams Don't Recognize Black People


Google is world wide, and having capable people from different back grounds would be an asset for them.

Also, in the past there use to be a lot more Women involved in computing, but then something happened to change that:

Computer Programming Used To Be Women’s Work


Take a look at people like people like Grace Hopper etc from the early days of programming. A lot of Women were involved and that changed later for some reason. We have to ask what the hell happened?

you either hire or promote the best people or you don't. If you don't then the best people are going to either get demotivated and leave or potential applicants will decide Google is a dodgy place to work.
I'd imagine computer work was very different in the 40's and 50's , Im sure it came up on a thread here before but cant remember the arguments, it wasn't the Patriarchy anyway

Skylinehead

Biggest lickspittle on boardz wrote: »

Well Google responded to a discussion on diversity by straight up hunting the guy down and firing him.

Keep this up and Trump will get reelected without any problems.

You really think people care? Random internet outrage ranks very, very low on peoples lists when it comes to elections.

wes

silverharp wrote: »

you either hire or promote the best people or you don't. If you don't then the best people are going to either get demotivated and leave or potential applicants will decide Google is a dodgy place to work.
I'd imagine computer work was very different in the 40's and 50's , Im sure it came up on a thread here before but cant remember the arguments, it wasn't the Patriarchy anyway

The diversity programs would argue that isn't happening that various bias are screwing over perfectly capable people.

wes

Biggest lickspittle on boardz wrote: »

Well Google responded to a discussion on diversity by straight up hunting the guy down and firing him.

He wasn't hunted down. He was put his name to his rant.

Biggest lickspittle on boardz wrote: »

Keep this up and Trump will get reelected without any problems.

Trump is a big fan of corporations being able to fire people at will. He even had a TV show were he did that on the regular :P.

Wombatman

Manach wrote: »

Stefan Molyneux has an insightful take on this, link.

As for the firing the employee instead of engaging with his points underpins the very nature of the cult of liberal diversity that is not open to heretic arguments based on logic but instead attempts to rely on the tried and true "point and shriek" method of dealing with dissent. Google is the company that the majority of the world's data and news flow through: thus at the very least a political neutral work environment should be key to allow different view points and avoid bias, not instead one seeming based on a Gender studies curriculum.

Do you really think the arguments in the memo are based on logic?

Men and women are biologically different ergo women are not suitable for software development or leadership roles. Stunning conclusion there Einstein.

Apples and oranges logic sprinkled with random negative female traits. Why didn't he state the women a better at multi tasking then men for example? In the "Women, on average, have more" section he makes 5 gross generalizations about women out of a possible 1000, no 10000. 4 of the 5 are pointing out limitations and 1 just states that women are neurotic. Cool. So next time a women isn't seeing things my way I can just fire out "Ah will you stop now hon, you are just being neurotic".

I mean what has this got to do with software development....

For heterosexual romantic relationships, men are more strongly judged by status and women by beauty. Again, this has biological origins and is culturally universal.

Men and women are biologically different. No sh1t Sherlock.

Apply the logic below to blue eyed people and non-blue eyed people, or gingers and non-gingers.
Non-gingers who have the hair dyed at birth behave like gingers.
So what fooking what! It has no baring on someone's ability to be a software developer or a leader.

On average, men and women biologically differ in many ways. These differences aren’t just socially constructed because:
·They’re universal across human cultures
·They often have clear biological causes and links to prenatal testosterone
·Biological males that were castrated at birth and raised as females often still identify and act like males
·The underlying traits are highly heritable
·They’re exactly what we would predict from an evolutionary psychology perspective

All that said I feel very uneasy about the sacking. If every woman who stated that all men were pigs or every man who made fun of a woman's driving was sacked, there would be a sh1t load of people on the dole.

silverharp

wes wrote: »

The diversity programs would argue that isn't happening that various bias are screwing over perfectly capable people.

well they would wouldn't they. Also there is a difference between "perfectly capable" and the best. Ive never hired anyone because they were the lowest acceptable unless I didn't have any better options.
We are talking about an industry that's begging Trump not to stop staff coming from India which implies there would be an open door to anyone with the right skills

Biggest lickspittle on boardz

Skylinehead wrote: »

You really think people care? Random internet outrage ranks very, very low on peoples lists when it comes to elections.

I think you are under estimating just how much of a backlash there was against this type of PC tyranny in the last election. There's a creeping authoritarian mindset that has set in within the liberals in the States.

It isn't so much internet outrage we're talking here, but this is an example of some absurd logic that is taking place every day in offices, colleges, and boardrooms across the US. It all adds up.

Sonics2k

Biggest lickspittle on boardz wrote: »

Well Google responded to a discussion on diversity by straight up hunting the guy down and firing him.

Keep this up and Trump will get reelected without any problems.

Didn't Trump just fire a bunch of people because he didn't like what they had to say? And all his supporters praised him for it.

Seems to me Trump voters should love Google.

Silver Lynel

wes wrote: »

Here is an admittedly extreme example from HP:

HP Face-Tracking Webcams Don't Recognize Black People

A terrible example.

The issue was not with skin tone, the issue was with lighting.

"HP Face Tracking Webcams Don't Perform As Well In Bad Lighting Conditions" would have been a more accurate headline. Of course, it wouldn't have been much of a headline.

This seems to be a recurring theme. People are able to take something and twist it until they can make references to racism or sexism.

"HP Selling Alt-Right Webcams"

Or, as I imagine you might argue, "your side are buying racist webcams, our side are simply buying webcams that don't work as well in bad lighting conditions".

wes

silverharp wrote: »

well they would wouldn't they. Also there is a difference between "perfectly capable" and the best. Ive never hired anyone because they were the lowest acceptable unless I didn't have any better options.

Semantics. Google will try and hire the best people they can, and I am sure they have the data to back up there decisions.

silverharp wrote: »

We are talking about an industry that's begging Trump not to stop staff coming from India which implies there would be an open door to anyone with the right skills

Trump is happy to use the same program to hire people for his own businesses. They aren't really in any danger as long as he does exactly what they do.

Skylinehead

Biggest lickspittle on boardz wrote: »

I think you are under estimating just how much of a backlash there was against this type of PC tyranny in the last election. There's a creeping authoritarian mindset that has set in within the liberals in the States.

It isn't so much internet outrage we're talking here, but this is an example of some absurd logic that is taking place every day in offices, colleges, and boardrooms across the US. It all adds up.

You're going way overboard with how much influence internet gender wars etc have in real life. Unless you're one of those that actually talks about it outside the internet...

silverharp

wes wrote: »

Semantics. Google will try and hire the best people they can, and I am sure they have the data to back up there decisions.

the best they can under their constraints. Either you hire by merit or you compromise

There is still the fundamental issue that high end IT related fields of study are vast majority male so it tells you something about interest in the field particularly after a couple of decades of "you go girl!"

wes

silverharp wrote: »

There is still the fundamental issue that high end IT related fields of study are vast majority male so it tells you something about interest in the field particularly after a couple of decades of "you go girl!"

So, we would then expect the case that the percentage of work force, would match roughly the percentage of Women graduating, which isn't the case for a lot of these tech companies.

Silver Lynel

Skylinehead wrote: »

You're going way overboard with how much influence internet gender wars etc have in real life. Unless you're one of those that actually talks about it outside the internet...

When you look at the absolute buffoon the USA elected as President and you consider how much his internet presence affected the election do you not start to wonder?

Like you, I also have severe doubts that all this internet bickering influences "real life" but there is a niggling doubt now.

I was at a comedy show very recently and the jokes were not offensive or political or even all that funny. Near the end of the show the comedian made some throwaway remark about "the LGBTLMNOP community or whatever they are calling themselves" and it was the biggest laugh and cheer and applause of the night.

It was a bit unsettling for me personally but it did get me thinking that maybe there is something more than we realize brewing under the surface in "real life" and that people are becoming increasing angry about things they are seeing online.

The "right" actually do seem to be controlling that narrative online. The "left" are perceived as unfunny, irrational, overly sensitive and authoritarian.

Even here, this guy complains about Google and it's not TOO unreasonable. He raises points and gets fired and it feeds the perception of "the left".

Google are probably right to fire him, from a purely corporate perspective, but it's not a good look. The guy uses some rational points to basically claim that Google has some kind of cult mentality and Google excommunicates him for saying that. This just confirms certain biases.

The harder you try to shut them down the more support they gain.

If you look at something like "Gamergate" then you can easily see that the efforts to shut down Gamergate involved maybe not being 100% honest here and there. The result was that Gamergate grew and grew and people who were once simply opinionated posters on message boards became highly popular and well paid internet celebrities.

On Youtube, for example, for every pro-Feminist channel with 10k viewers there is an anti-Feminist channel with over 100k viewers, even more sometimes.

You allow people to say what they want anonymously and they will rant and rant and rant about SJWs. They might not speak about it in the real world but I am sure many people are thinking it.

They probably don't want to speak up because it will cost them their job. However, nobody knows who you voted for.

I think about that and then I look at Donald Trump. I'll admit that the hysteria following his election was hilarious to me and that makes me wonder if maybe there is a connection.

Sonics2k

Have the people getting pissed off actually read this guys manifesto?

It's complete gibberish and garbage

"I'm simply stating that the distribution of preferences and abilities of men and women differ in part due to biological causes and that these differences may explain why we don't see equal representation of women in tech and leadership."

I'm starting to see why he lost his job. Because he's a dickhead.

Maximus Alexander

LionelNashe wrote: »

I especially liked this bit:

Left Biases

• Compassion for the weak
• Disparities are due to injustices
• Humans are inherently cooperative
• Change is good (unstable)
• Open
• Idealist

Right Biases

• Respect for the strong/authority
• Disparities are natural and just
• Humans are inherently competitive
• Change is dangerous (stable)
• Closed
• Pragmatic

I've always felt this distills down quite nicely to:

Left Biases

• Optimisitc

Right Biases

• Scared

Sonics2k

Sonics2k wrote: »

Have the people getting pissed off actually read this guys manifesto?

It's complete gibberish and garbage



I'm starting to see why he lost his job. Because he's a dickhead.

A good response
https://medium.com/@yonatanzunger/so-about-this-googlers-manifesto-1e3773ed1788

Skylinehead

Silver Lynel wrote: »

When you look at the absolute buffoon the USA elected as President and you consider how much his internet presence affected the election do you not start to wonder?

"It's the economy, stupid"

Thus it always was. People voted for Trump because he offered them jobs.

silverharp

wes wrote: »

So, we would then expect the case that the percentage of work force, would match roughly the percentage of Women graduating, which isn't the case for a lot of these tech companies.

Ive no data in front of me but one assumes the female (IT) graduates are gainfully employed and assuming so Ill guess that they are more likely to seek out government jobs, corporate IT jobs or stay in education or other safer jobs and maybe more risk adverse so avoid start up companies etc. or they don't like the career and migrate into other areas after a time.

Silver Lynel

wes wrote: »

So, we would then expect the case that the percentage of work force, would match roughly the percentage of Women graduating, which isn't the case for a lot of these tech companies.

Are you aware of the "God of the Gaps" fallacy?

I think you are doing something similar here. Sexism of the Gaps.

It seems like instead of showing that tech companies have sexist hiring policies you are looking at the data and saying "the percentage of women in the workforce doesn't match the percentage of women graduating" and using that as evidence of sexist hiring policies.

Just saying.

Silver Lynel

Skylinehead wrote: »

"It's the economy, stupid"

Thus it always was. People voted for Trump because he offered them jobs.

That is my basic belief too, yes.

There were only 6 states that flipped from Blue to Red, winning Trump the election, and I believe that the motivating factor for those Blue to Red changes was jobs.

Still, the guy got a lot of votes and I can't shake that idea there was influence from online sources that are going on about gender or culture wars.

kupus

Gender equality hmmm

Riddle me this......

If your house was on fire and you had two people beside you to save your kid inside but you could only pick one, which would you pick?

A female firefighter, 5 ft 2 and 1 year into the job.
A male fireFighter 6 ft 2 and 10 years into the job.

Which would you trust to get the job done?

Sonics2k

kupus wrote: »

Gender equality hmmm

Riddle me this......

If your house was on fire and you had two people beside you to save your kid inside but you could only pick one, which would you pick?

A female firefighter, 5 ft 2 and 1 year into the job.
A male fireFighter 6 ft 2 and 10 years into the job.

Which would you trust to get the job done?

The one with 10 years experience.

But, what in the hell has that got to do with a persons ability to write code?

Which by the way, does not get better or worse depending on what's between your legs.

Silver Lynel

kupus wrote: »

Gender equality hmmm

Riddle me this......

If your house was on fire and you had two people beside you to save your kid inside but you could only pick one, which would you pick?

A female firefighter, 5 ft 2 and 1 year into the job.
A male fireFighter 6 ft 2 and 10 years into the job.

Which would you trust to get the job done?

Why not both?

Silver Lynel

Sonics2k wrote: »

Have the people getting pissed off actually read this guys manifesto?

It's complete gibberish and garbage

I'm starting to see why he lost his job. Because he's a dickhead.

OK.

Is ALL of it complete gibberish and garbage, or just some of it?

Are there parts of it that make you think "actually that's reasonable"?

So what I see happening here is people taking "sides".

If you are on this side over here you will throw out all of his good points and keep the bad ones. Then you will say he is a lunatic who deserves to be fired and anyone who supports him is an Alt-Right (why not just Right) nutter who proves exactly why we still need Feminism.

If you are on this side over here you will throw out all of his bad points and keep the good ones. Then you will say that this is a prefect example of Google being a cult and part of the evil authoritarian left. I mean, just look how they fired this guy for just making rational points.

What if people are just "muting" the other side or ignoring the things that don't fit their particular stance on this?

In your opinion this guy is just 100% wrong on everything he has written?