James Damore's memo
227 views
Skip to first unread message
Mark Tarver
Aug 10, 2017, 6:20:11 AM8/10/17
to Shen
Just read an interesting paper by James Damore - formerly of Google - who got fired for questioning Google's work practices.
Having read it I think firing him was an amazingly clumsy move by Google. It totally confirms the title of the memo. The articles in the Guardian are just so dismal; totally pillories his views.
Anyway read it if you haven't done so. I'm not working for a software company and so cannot comment on current practice; though some people here might have a take.
Mark
Bruno Deferrari
Aug 10, 2017, 9:56:11 AM8/10/17
to qil...@googlegroups.com
Here is some leaked footage of Google's onboarding process for new hires (to ensure culture affinity):
--Mark
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Shen" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to qilang+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to qil...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/qilang.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
BD
Terry Palfrey
Aug 10, 2017, 2:42:01 PM8/10/17
to Shen
I've been watching this since it blew up. timeline seems to be:
3 year employee attends diversity course that is not, as standard, videotaped for
general distribution as are other courses and discussions.
ponders what was presented as opposed to what he is feeling and observing and
crafts a memo to summarize his thoughts which he shares with his colleagues/peers.
reaction is such that after several weeks he then reaches further to a group called
skeptics inside google for deeper discussion.
memo leaked outside the company and a shit storm ensues after the first several
interpretations of his observations are indeed pilloried with terms like misogynist
manifesto and racist screed.
social media piles on after a news outlet published it in total but without links in
original document. the wave builds over that day and crashes on various shores as
relentlessly as an incoming tide.
in the US facts no longer matter for an opinion to be formed, nor do you need to
actually understand what you are talking about or even be informed on the
matters to hand.
here's the first interview done by an alt-right personality, Damore is a conservative
and 28 years old. it's important as a baseline for what is to come:
Mark Tarver
Aug 10, 2017, 4:39:22 PM8/10/17
to qil...@googlegroups.com
According to this report of the meeting to determine how Google should respond . ..
“It was a cordial discussion, considering the topic, and you could see how you could argue both sides on the face of it,” said one source. “But I think Damore’s focus on biology really made it clear that he had crossed the line.”
What turned the tide, said sources, was when it was noted that if Damore’s dubious contentions about women’s skills were replaced by those about race or religion, there would be no debate.
In fact, Wojcicki [CEO Youtube] said as much in her essay:
“For instance, what if we replaced the word ‘women’ in the memo with another group? What if the memo said that biological differences amongst Black, Hispanic, or LGBTQ employees explained their underrepresentation in tech and leadership roles? Would some people still be discussing the merit of the memo’s arguments or would there be a universal call for swift action against its author? I don’t ask this to compare one group to another, but rather to point out that the language of discrimination can take many different forms and none are acceptable or productive.”
Where are the critical thinking skills in this passage? For example if I truly assert "My plant needs watering and plant food" and you point out that if we replace "my plant" by "Donald Trump" the result is false in what way does this show that my original statement was unfounded? Or is it that this woman actually doesn't care if the original thesis was true or false and that it should be rejected simply because if it were predicated of any group it would be rejected by the majority and is therefore 'unacceptable and unproductive'.
I think two observations would have to be made here; the first is that his memo actually is not universally rejected at all - simply by a group of rather powerful people. And the second is that this business of suppressing views simply because they distress people is totally contrary to our Western democratic and scientific tradition. It is exactly the stuff that Galileo fought against centuries ago. The correct response would to have contested his position honestly and openly. Not doing that, but simply sacking the guy makes Google look like the old Roman church.
Mark
Mark Tarver
Aug 10, 2017, 4:58:51 PM8/10/17
to qil...@googlegroups.com
As I understood the guy he was arguing something like this.
1. There are cognitive differences between men and women which predispose men and
women to choose different professions.
2. Therefore the biased gender ratios in fields like IT need not reflect a bias in the recruitment process or in gender treatment.
3. Therefore positive discrimination programs may not be addressing a social issue but are in
some way trying to subvert a natural preference and may be actively harmful.
It's an argument, one may disagree, but it needs to be talked through.
Mark
Bruno Deferrari
Aug 10, 2017, 6:49:31 PM8/10/17
to qil...@googlegroups.com
On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 5:39 PM, Mark Tarver <dr.mt...@gmail.com> wrote:
According to this report of the meeting to determine how Google should respond . ..“It was a cordial discussion, considering the topic, and you could see how you could argue both sides on the face of it,” said one source. “But I think Damore’s focus on biology really made it clear that he had crossed the line.”What turned the tide, said sources, was when it was noted that if Damore’s dubious contentions about women’s skills were replaced by those about race or religion, there would be no debate.In fact, Wojcicki [CEO Youtube] said as much in her essay:“For instance, what if we replaced the word ‘women’ in the memo with another group? What if the memo said that biological differences amongst Black, Hispanic, or LGBTQ employees explained their underrepresentation in tech and leadership roles? Would some people still be discussing the merit of the memo’s arguments or would there be a universal call for swift action against its author? I don’t ask this to compare one group to another, but rather to point out that the language of discrimination can take many different forms and none are acceptable or productive.”Where are the critical thinking skills in this passage? For example if I truly assert "My plant needs watering and plant food" and you point out that if we replace "my plant" by "Donald Trump" the result is false in what way does this show that my original statement was unfounded? Or is it that this woman actually doesn't care if the original thesis was true or false and that it should be rejected simply because if it were predicated of any group it would be rejected by the majority and is therefore 'unacceptable and unproductive'.
You can't find critical thinking skills there because it is not about reasoning anything, she is just making the association between Damore, sexism, racism, etc so that it stays like that in the reader's mind. Except for a few exceptions (and that article is not one of them), everything I have read condemning him was written in bad faith, painting him as a monster and mis-representing his arguments.
BD
Terry Palfrey
Aug 11, 2017, 7:06:47 PM8/11/17
to Shen
Bruno Deferrari
Aug 11, 2017, 8:57:23 PM8/11/17
to qil...@googlegroups.com
Written by Damore himself: https://www.wsj.com/articles/why-i-was-fired-by-google-1502481290
On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 7:59 PM, Terry Palfrey <terrypa...@gmail.com> wrote:
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Shen" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to qilang+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to qil...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/qilang.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
BD
Mark Tarver
Aug 12, 2017, 3:06:55 AM8/12/17
to qil...@googlegroups.com
I can remember when feminism really began to take hold, that it would provide an alternative to aggressive, confrontational male attitudes and issue in an era of consensus and consultation. But what it seems to have produced is this horrible atmosphere of repression where people are afraid to speak their minds in case it upsets the wrong people. There is a sort of warped modus tollens employed which says if P implies Q and Q upsets people then P is false. Google seem to have fallen into this.
I much prefer the traditional masculine confrontational may-the-best-man win; provided it doesn't get bitchy and personal. Consensus evaluation produces a form of dictatorship.
Mark
Terry Palfrey
Aug 12, 2017, 7:34:43 AM8/12/17
to Shen
The ripples keep spreading, Damore is in the grip of the 'causes' now.
Terry Palfrey
Aug 12, 2017, 7:35:02 AM8/12/17
to Shen
The whole matter is taking on the feel of a calving glacier at the beginning of spring.
Mark Tarver
Aug 12, 2017, 11:13:18 AM8/12/17
to qil...@googlegroups.com
These diversity people remind me of the political commissars in the old Soviet army. Senior officers were genuinely scared of these people whose reports could make you disappear. I'm glad I don't work for Goolag.
Mark
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Army
Officers who remained soon found all of their decisions being closely examined by political officers, even in mundane matters such as record-keeping and field training exercises.[84] An atmosphere of fear and unwillingness to take the initiative soon pervaded the Red Army; ...... The purges significantly impaired the combat capabilities of the Red Army. Hoyt concludes "the Soviet defense system was damaged to the point of incompetence" and stresses "the fear in which high officers lived."[85] Clark says, " Stalin not only cut the heart out of the army, he also gave it brain damage."[86] Lewin identifies three serious results: the loss of experienced and well-trained senior officers; the distrust it caused among potential allies especially France; and the encouragement it gave Germany.[87][88]
On Sat, Aug 12, 2017 at 8:57 AM, Terry Palfrey <terrypa...@gmail.com> wrote:
The whole matter is taking on the feel of a calving glacier at the beginning of spring.
Jacob
Aug 12, 2017, 1:22:32 PM8/12/17
to Shen
I do think that something positive has come from this, it shows the true face of Goolag, it shows that anything slightly resembling a conservative viewpoint is not tolerated. What group is truly being suppressed in America today, is it LGBTQXYZ123, is it women, is it liberals? Conservatives are ousted in schools, in media, and in the tech industry. This fellow had no idea how bad it was because he leans slightly to the left, he did not know that if any of his viewpoints were near the 95 mark that he would be ostracized without question. I watch debates between the right and left often, there is a reason that the left resorts to silencing and defaming; they get thrashed by rational, fact based arguments otherwise. Go watch Ben Shapiro for a little while, you will learn very quickly why someone like him cannot be allowed to speak.
Pride comes before a fall.
On Saturday, August 12, 2017 at 11:13:18 AM UTC-4, Mark Tarver wrote:
These diversity people remind me of the political commissars in the old Soviet army. Senior officers were genuinely scared of these people whose reports could make you disappear. I'm glad I don't work for Goolag.Markhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_ArmyOfficers who remained soon found all of their decisions being closely examined by political officers, even in mundane matters such as record-keeping and field training exercises.[84] An atmosphere of fear and unwillingness to take the initiative soon pervaded the Red Army; ...... The purges significantly impaired the combat capabilities of the Red Army. Hoyt concludes "the Soviet defense system was damaged to the point of incompetence" and stresses "the fear in which high officers lived."[85] Clark says, " Stalin not only cut the heart out of the army, he also gave it brain damage."[86] Lewin identifies three serious results: the loss of experienced and well-trained senior officers; the distrust it caused among potential allies especially France; and the encouragement it gave Germany.[87][88]
On Sat, Aug 12, 2017 at 8:57 AM, Terry Palfrey <terrypa...@gmail.com> wrote:
The whole matter is taking on the feel of a calving glacier at the beginning of spring.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Shen" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to qilang+un...@googlegroups.com.
Terry Palfrey
Aug 13, 2017, 3:47:04 AM8/13/17
to Shen
Last thing, Rubin Report, 1/2 hour video.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to qilang+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages