Senior Google engineer criticizes diversity, employees go nuts

Adjust content blocking

kmichel

Channel: FJNN

next random

Comment

Senior Google engineer criticizes diversity, employees go nuts. Today, news broke about a memo being passed around Google. Written by a politically conservative

Today, news broke about a memo being passed around Google. Written by a politically conservative senior software engineer at Google, the media is ablaze with negative articles labeling his memo a "manifesto" and "screed". Google employees also took to Twitter to express utter shock and indignation about the memo, calling for him to be fired. What did he write exactly? The full memo is pasted in three parts below, after a brief summary and Twitter comments from Google employees.

This one bothered me a lot, because the employee is simply tired of being in the closet about his views, and makes a heartfelt appeal for ideological diversity and better treatment of conservative employees. Please take the time to look through the memo at the bottom, it's a very interesting read.

Here's a sampling of some of the outrage.

Below is the entire 10 page memo, organized in two columns for easier reading.

Tags: Google | diversity

E ] ii TECH INSIDER
A senior engineer at Google wrote a manifesto against
diversity and employees are furious
Alexei( EB at

...

+1603

Views: 75420 Submitted: 08/06/2017

Hide Comments

Add Comment Refresh (177)

First 2 3 4 5 Last Next

[ 177 comments ]

Top Rated Controversial Best Lowest Rated Newest

Live Updates: On

Options

asd

#59 - matoromahri

Reply +59 123456789123345869

(08/06/2017) [+] (15 replies)

stickied by kmichel

This has been pretty divisive over the past couple days, for those interested in further reading, here is a rebuttal ( medium.com/@yonatanzunger/so-about-th... and the Hacker News discussion on it ( news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14939636). Very polarizing.

#145 to #59 - anon id: c2047eb4

Reply -1 123456789123345869

(08/07/2017) [-]

those links lead to nowhere.
wonder why.

#165 to #145 - matoromahri

Reply 0 123456789123345869

(08/07/2017) [-]

Sorry, just remove the parenthesis at the end.

#82 to #59 - theancienthawaiian

Reply 0 123456789123345869

(08/06/2017) [-]

404 error

#96 to #82 - kmichel [OP]

Reply +5 123456789123345869

(08/06/2017) [-]

Just need to get rid of the extra parentheses.

news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14939636
medium.com/@yonatanzunger/so-about-th...

#101 to #59 - anon id: 2710bd5b

Reply 0 123456789123345869

(08/06/2017) [-]

Find an archive link, I'm already getting a 404

#115 to #59 - mcshwagger

Reply 0 123456789123345869

(08/06/2017) [-]

I am getting 404's on the links posted.

#120 to #115 - tehbomb

Reply +2 123456789123345869

(08/06/2017) [-]

>>#96,

#149 to #59 - Sects

Reply 0 123456789123345869

(08/07/2017) [-]

Can you please repost the link?

#164 to #149 - matoromahri

Reply 0 123456789123345869

(08/07/2017) [-]

Sorry, just remove the parenthesis at the end.

#162 to #59 - rhaswar

Reply 0 123456789123345869

(08/07/2017) [-]

both links are 404, what should I be looking for?

#163 to #162 - matoromahri

Reply 0 123456789123345869

(08/07/2017) [-]

Sorry, just remove the parenthesis at the end.

#170 to #59 - ronwethefallenone

Reply 0 123456789123345869

(08/07/2017) [-]

The rebuttal no longer exists.

#125 to #59 - SuperWeapons

Reply +5 123456789123345869

(08/06/2017) [-]

I really wish the paper and rebutal would post scientific studies that back their claims...

#134 to #59 - anon id: a9752d16

Reply +6 123456789123345869

(08/06/2017) [-]

The first rebutal, while pretentious and lazy, has one valid point to it, that programming an interface and search engine aimed at users requires in fact already some knowledge about people. Beyond that, it's trash. It still has some good serious criticism posts below the obvious damage control ones. If you can upvote them maybe you should consider doing so.

The second link however does provide some much needed insight and I find myself agreeing with a lot of commentors that provide both a more moderate criticism (still with mistakes and imprecissions) while cleaning and chewing at the feet of other much more malicious posters.

Overall this dialog needs to happen in open forums by people who are willing to dissect the arguments and provide evidence in a respectful manner, we can't just say "damn the right /left", we need to pay attention to what the science says about it, actual sociology psychiatry and linguistics in concrete cases instead of just hugging our own opinions.

#74 to #59 - kmichel [OP]

Reply +7 123456789123345869

(08/06/2017) [-]

It was interesting to read the criticism by Yonatan, a former Google employee, and the comments on his article in your second link.

I agree with some of the commenters that Yonatan makes a few good points about empathy and teamwork being important for the success of a team or company, but he lets his emotions cloud his judgement and doesn't seem to really grasp the nuances of the original author's argument. He also starts off very weak by claiming that the memo's arguments on gender "[fly] directly in the face of all research done in the field for decades", while in the same paragraph conceding that "I am neither a biologist, a psychologist, nor a sociologist, so I’ll leave that to someone else".

The lack of understanding is pretty apparent when Yonatan says that the author "just put out a manifesto inside the company arguing that some large fraction of [his] colleagues are at root not good enough to do their jobs". You find the same misunderstanding in a few of the comments of your second link, with people conflating differences with inferiority, possibly because they feel inferior themselves. The author was only saying that men and women are biologically different, and that these differences may explain gender discrepancies in certain fields or in leadership positions. He's careful to say that differences are averaged, that there is significant overlap between individuals of different sexes, and finally that individual aptitude rather than averaged qualities should factor into hiring decisions.

#176 - onegaishimasu

Reply +3 123456789123345869

(08/08/2017) [-]

stickied by kmichel

kmichel sticky?

For anyone looking for it, here's a sharable alternative link to the memo!

assets.documentcloud.org/documents/39...

#2 - demonruler

Reply +552 123456789123345869

(08/06/2017) [-]

"Oh no, he wants us to focus on people who would be diverse in the way we think, therefore bettering technological advancement. Why is intelligence more important than race and sex?" suck my dick

#117 to #2 - PowerofAnonymous

Reply +3 123456789123345869

(08/06/2017) [-]

Pandora focuses on hiring women and people of color, if you check their careers page. Its insane.

#118 to #117 - PowerofAnonymous

Reply +4 123456789123345869

(08/06/2017) [-]

The music app, not the jewelry store

#47 to #2 - pigbull

Reply +72 123456789123345869

(08/06/2017) [-]

**pigbull roll picture searched truth** The left is hating him but I don't understand how one can hate a fact.
You can't disagree with gravity and fly around. This **** is not up for debate.

Now if he said an opinion in any of those 10 pages then sure It would be reasonably for people to hate him. But in all those 10 pages all I saw was the truth.

#6 - anon id: 4db7ed4c

Reply +301 123456789123345869

(08/06/2017) [-]

Sad that little will come of this. He'll be fired to appease the frothing hordes, and this will be forgotten before long.

#43 to #6 - bemybeaver

Reply +17 123456789123345869

(08/06/2017) [-]

If all that agree would do the same, not fearing losing their jobs for betterment of science, this would change very fast

#102 to #6 - antiponiesuser

Reply +19 123456789123345869

(08/06/2017) [-]

Wouldn't that be a PR hell?

If he keeps figthing because they fired him, many more people will see that.

You can't fire a person for educatedly and politely saying "hiring a person absed on skin color rather than skills is a bad idea"

#123 to #102 - anon id: 3c045ed4

Reply +4 123456789123345869

(08/06/2017) [-]

You can and they likely will as soon as it's convenient

#7 to #6 - kmichel [OP]

Reply +166 123456789123345869

(08/06/2017) [-]

California has at least one thing going for it when it comes to social issues like these. There are laws in 5 states that treat political affiliation as a 'protected class' and prohibit discrimination based on the politics of an employee. Since the memo seems to have been written with a clear head, I think the law may be in this guy's favor.

#21 to #7 - scarredwolf

Reply +121 123456789123345869

(08/06/2017) [-]

Therefore google will just put him on the "too be fired at first convenience" list

#24 to #7 - dgurevich

Reply +31 123456789123345869

(08/06/2017) [-]

Still won't prevent his colleagues treating him like **** though.
This also heavily depends on his position in the company, as personnel are not simply dismissed because someone not directly responsible for him thinks he should go.
Usually, its the other way round.
And now for a short story:
A programmer in a company I used to work at was not satisfied with his teammates for a professional reason.
He went to the group director to complain
The group director, swing the issue was trivial said he can't do anything.
The programmer simply quit.
He did not go on a social media campaign, or do anything to publicise his issue, he simply gracefully left. In places like google, I expect well behaved rational people.
Maybe its the army discipline from years past, but I can't imagine a company like this with people like that in it.

#31 to #24 - anon id: cdc60e4d

Reply +15 123456789123345869

(08/06/2017) [-]

actually if they mistreat him in anyway shape or form he can sue on discrimination and will easily win due to the laws in CA

#66 to #31 - cupcakescankill

Reply +16 123456789123345869

(08/06/2017) [-]

He will lose for not being an "oppressed" class.

#72 to #66 - cabbagemayhem

Reply +16 123456789123345869

(08/06/2017) [-]

Yeah, "protected class" is a one way street. Age discrimination only applies to people over 40, sex discrimination only applies to women, and racial discrimination only applies to minorities. Young white males have no protection against discrimination.

#83 to #7 - thebigbadbeest

Reply +2 123456789123345869

(08/06/2017) [-]

I'm pretty sure that is to protect socialist and unionist

#174 to #7 - scarredwolf

Reply 0 123456789123345869

(08/08/2017) [-]

I was right, he got fired

#5 - theancienthawaiian

Reply +140 123456789123345869

(08/06/2017) [-]

I actually agree with him on most points, he contradicts himself a little in how he sees women, but 90% is still an A. Other companies should take note.

#32 to #5 - mychaelmoar

Reply +21 123456789123345869

(08/06/2017) [-]

It seems that he personally leans more toward the societal push towards feminism and female empowerment while acknowledging the historical and biological precedents for women (and men) having the roles that they do.

#25 to #5 - anon id: 15f8067d

Reply +25 123456789123345869

(08/06/2017) [-]

I might have missed where he contradicts himself, care to elaborate?

#88 to #25 - vortexrain

Reply +4 123456789123345869

(08/06/2017) [-]

It's been seventeen hours, I don't think he's going to defend his point.

#68 to #5 - anon id: dced244d

Reply +27 123456789123345869

(08/06/2017) [-]

He actually seems to respect women and view them as equals while still acknowledging inherent differences. Pretty rare view these days with everyone being so ******* extremely right or left leaning.

#104 to #68 - antiponiesuser

Reply +6 123456789123345869

(08/06/2017) [-]

Most people are right leaning because we are given no other choice (yes, we, myself included)

I won't settle for people stepping over me while i work 12 hours a day. I demand a little respect at my 21 years.

So yep, hail hortler it is, unfortunately...

#139 to #68 - anon id: 20e05434

Reply +1 123456789123345869

(08/06/2017) [-]

that's not rare
that's how people generally see it
like everyone that calls out the ******** of feminism/sjws and all that ****
that's been the arguments against them (feminsts/sjws)

#33 - icedpyro

Reply +131 123456789123345869

(08/06/2017) [-]

"Conservatives are a minority that feel they need to stay in the closet to avoid open hostility"

"Our focus on microaggressions and other unintentional transgressions increases our sensitivity, which is not universally positive: sensitivity increases both our tendency to take offence and our self censorship leading to authoritarian policy."

Well said, but unfortunately this paper will be silenced for these exact reasons.

#19 - Ruspanic

Reply +98 123456789123345869

(08/06/2017) [-]

Most of this is very reasonable, perceptive and well-stated. I wonder if the people who are so outraged about it even read the whole thing, or if they're just giving the response they think is expected of them

#107 to #19 - allnamesrgone

Reply +7 123456789123345869

(08/06/2017) [-]

this kind of opinion isn't acceptable in today's western world

between this, youtube demonetizing and hiding "problematic" videos, reddit shadowbanning wrongthink and supressing the_donald (although granted, that place is cancer), facebook hiding problematic newsfeed as "fake news" and banning conservatives, and twitter also outright banning anti-progressives, there just isn't a platform for people to voice opinions like this

and for a lot of people, even if they don't strictly adhere to the extreme left progressive regime, they will still immediately speak out against statements like these because they are so rare and go against the general opinion

#161 to #107 - anon id: 0f99b4a8

Reply 0 123456789123345869

(08/07/2017) [-]

Pretty sure the_donald subreddit is cancer, simply by virtue of being a subreddit. I've looked at it ocassionally and it's about hit or miss as anything like that.

#20 to #19 - kmichel [OP]

Reply +19 123456789123345869

(08/06/2017) [-]

What's sad about the response is that people chose the tiniest snippets that could be found offensive, giving them justification (in their minds) to ignore the rest.

#27 to #20 - Ruspanic

Reply +3 123456789123345869

(08/06/2017) [-]

Yeah, when I see that sort of thing - excerpts or quotes taken blatantly out of context to seem more outrageous - I always wonder about the person who selected the excerpts. Are they lying intentionally to stir up outrage? Surely nobody can be that much of a selective reader by accident.

I see this on both sides of the political spectrum. Most people who spread misleading quotes or fabricated controversies or "fake news" are just people who were duped and didn't bother to double-check, but the originator has to be downright malicious. Right?

#34 - rhjunior

Reply +79 123456789123345869

(08/06/2017) [-]

or you could, ya know, just hire the people who are BEST AT DOING THE JOB....

#56 to #34 - leonhardt

Reply -1 123456789123345869

(08/06/2017) [-]

But that's racist because ********* and women are objectively worse at almost any job compared to a white man.

#77 to #56 - vicetone

Reply +5 123456789123345869

(08/06/2017) [-]

It's probably Asian guys that are the best at tech jobs dude.

#100 to #77 - antiponiesuser

Reply +2 123456789123345869

(08/06/2017) [-]

We have an indian team supporting us, and the main bulk of the IT are all polish. also all the 3 polish girls are top hotties + great knowledge of systems

#85 to #34 - vortexrain

Reply +6 123456789123345869

(08/06/2017) [-]

But meritocracy is racist because muh PoCs are oppressed, and can't learn because of muh systemic racism, and remember that it's impossible to racist towards whites.

#73 to #34 - wahooooo

Reply +12 123456789123345869

(08/06/2017) [-]

But that's gonna piss off a ton of people when you hire a bunch of 25 year old white males.

JK, obviously if they were going to hire without bias, they would have a diverse mix. However, less than one percent of women in high school plan on pursuing STEM degrees or other semi-related fields. Things like this get overlooked when companies focus too hard on having a "diverse workforce." Yeah, it'd be great if as many women were interested in the same positions, but it just doesn't work that way in the real world.

#35 to #34 - heruss

Reply +25 123456789123345869

(08/06/2017) [-]

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHA.

Yeah, HR managers aren't going to do that because they need to focus on DIVERDITEEEEEEEEE.

Never mind that too many women go for crap degrees, and other minorities are usually "under represented" because there's just not that many of them to begin with, and the pool of those going into necessary degrees is even god damn smaller. Of those you're bound to see only the usual amount of "top tier geniuses" meaning most are average at best.

Which of course, in the minds of these warped self flagellating morons must must mean the people doing the hiring are themselves racists! Because you can totally be racist without realising it. Never mind it's clearly a numbers game, no, just dog whistle some more to the other brain dead guilty morons and the problem will all go away.

#8 - anon id: e8328da8

Reply +72 123456789123345869

(08/06/2017) [-]

He will be fired. Liberals are not tolerant.

#3 - Shmooglavoue

Reply +61 123456789123345869

(08/06/2017) [-]

Someone should print it out, and nail the memo to the door of Google headquarters (or superglue it if it's not wood).

#133 to #3 - anon id: c052f681

Reply +1 123456789123345869

(08/06/2017) [-]

I like the reference.

Good on you.

#9 - baconweasel

Reply +42 123456789123345869

(08/06/2017) [-]

This is great. Some of the most well thought out and reasonable observations I have ever seen.

It's too bad that people like this are not just shamed into silence, but sometimes also threatened with physical harm or the loss of their source of income for expressing their views.

First 2 3 4 5 Last Next

[ 177 comments ]

Add Comment