- Apr 5, 2010
- 80,206
- 32,288
- 2,300
Well, that's depressing.
The worst thing is, if you actually READ the letter, he's trying to help Google when it comes to Diversity at the company.
Navigation
Install the app
How to install the app on iOS
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
More options
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Google fires diversity manifesto author James Damore for wrong think
- Thread starter MindWars
- Start date
Well, that's depressing.
The worst thing is, if you actually READ the letter, he's trying to help Google when it comes to Diversity at the company.
cnelsen
Gold Member
- Banned
- #22
"In truth, feminism is hostility." and other gems by Steve Sailer:
Does the increasing campus hysteria and anti-rationality portend bad news for Silicon Valley? If students increasingly grow up in a culture in which the person with the most wounded feelings rules, will they be able to code emotionless computers as well as in the past?
With the tech industry already immense, and soon to attempt to take over the auto industry with self-driving cars, those are trillion-dollar questions.
We may have gotten a hint of an answer this week whether blue-state America’s worsening climate of science denialism will backfire on the giant tech quasi-monopolies when Google CEO Sundar Pichai publicly fired a software engineer for writing a carefully argued memo, “Google’s Ideological Echo Chamber.”
The brilliant young coder is James Damore, a former doctoral student in systems biology at Harvard. In case you are wondering what systems biology is, here’s Harvard’s explanation:
Systems Biology aims to explain how higher level properties of complex biological systems arise from the interactions among their parts. This field requires a fusion of concepts from many disciplines, including biology, computer science, applied mathematics, physics and engineering.
Ironically, Damore was fired for defending Google against the libel that only rampant sexism can explain why the second-richest company in the world doesn’t employ 50 percent women in technical jobs (much as Larry Summers was forced out as president of Harvard a decade ago in sizable measure for defending Harvard from similar charges).
In response, the Google CEO argued, in effect, that Google’s female employees, being highly emotional and not very logical women, can’t be expected to not take personally abstract masculine concepts such as “averages.”
It’s not punching down for the Indian-born CEO of Google (who was paid $200 million last year) to fire a twentysomething coder, it’s punching up because the victim’s a white male, just as it wasn’t punching down for Apple CEO Tim Cook to attack an Indiana pizza maker because Tim is gay. (In today’s zeitgeist, the billionaire always wins.)
Wikileaks' Podesta dump included an email from Eric Schmidt offering the Dems a way to build in depth profiles on every voter in the country along with their political veiws.With the tech industry already immense, and soon to attempt to take over the auto industry with self-driving cars, those are trillion-dollar questions.
We may have gotten a hint of an answer this week whether blue-state America’s worsening climate of science denialism will backfire on the giant tech quasi-monopolies when Google CEO Sundar Pichai publicly fired a software engineer for writing a carefully argued memo, “Google’s Ideological Echo Chamber.”
The brilliant young coder is James Damore, a former doctoral student in systems biology at Harvard. In case you are wondering what systems biology is, here’s Harvard’s explanation:
Systems Biology aims to explain how higher level properties of complex biological systems arise from the interactions among their parts. This field requires a fusion of concepts from many disciplines, including biology, computer science, applied mathematics, physics and engineering.
Ironically, Damore was fired for defending Google against the libel that only rampant sexism can explain why the second-richest company in the world doesn’t employ 50 percent women in technical jobs (much as Larry Summers was forced out as president of Harvard a decade ago in sizable measure for defending Harvard from similar charges).
In response, the Google CEO argued, in effect, that Google’s female employees, being highly emotional and not very logical women, can’t be expected to not take personally abstract masculine concepts such as “averages.”
It’s not punching down for the Indian-born CEO of Google (who was paid $200 million last year) to fire a twentysomething coder, it’s punching up because the victim’s a white male, just as it wasn’t punching down for Apple CEO Tim Cook to attack an Indiana pizza maker because Tim is gay. (In today’s zeitgeist, the billionaire always wins.)
Granted, all of this sounds ridiculous, which it is. If Google’s CEO actually believed that his firm was leaving money on the table by not employing enough women (or black or Hispanic) engineers due to sexism, it would be his fiduciary duty to hire far more.
But of course he has zero intention of doing much of that.
Why can’t Google, with all its money, find as many women as men?
For one reason, because coding doesn’t much appeal to women. My wife, for instance, used to be a computer programmer. She was good at it, but it’s a boring job if you find people more interesting than things. Further, American programmers used to be rather well paid, but then the H-1B visa program allowed employers to substitute cheaper Asian men for American women.
Google became the second-most valuable company in the world (following only Apple, an especially white-male-led company) largely on the strength of its hardworking white and Asian male workforce. For Google to blow up $655 billion in market capitalization by taking seriously the current year’s Narrative about how diversity is our strength would be insane.
On the other hand, $655 billion inevitably attracts parasites.
It’s important to understand the recent political history to have a sense of where things are headed.
The firing of Damore for telling the truth reflects a general trend pushed by the government for a generation for shutting down free expression at work. Veteran legal analyst Walter Olson noted yesterday:
...Government pressure on employers to ban speech consisted less of direct you-must-ban mandates and more of litigation incentives. Legal or HR will counsel employer that allowing the bad speech to go undisciplined might be a Title VII offense, or evidence of one…. So as a way of evading responsibility it’s kind of brilliant. Those in power can blame private actors who in turn feel their hands tied.Olson goes on:
A few decades ago, you could waste some money on affirmative action hires, give them nice titles and offices, and often they’d happily let the real workers get back to work.
But today’s quota kids have been trained to sniff out microaggressions against their amour propre. If anybody like Damore objects, it’s proof of sexism, racism, or whatever else the government’s out to crush. The New Sensitivity is a perpetual motion machine for extracting payoffs that has evolved over decades of trial and error.
Yet for the longest time, Silicon Valley considered itself not subject to the civil rights bureaucracies and social pressures that pester the more uncool parts of the business world.
Why? Because it was high-tech and thus it was good. Disparate impact in hiring must be the result of old bad prejudices, so, obviously, futuristic tech companies shouldn’t have to worry about not hiring many women or blacks.
For decades, therefore, when Jesse Jackson intermittently tried to shake down Silicon Valley, he was routinely sent packing with a pittance and scoffing laughter. As recently as 2011, I pointed out that Silicon Valley largely ignored the diversity demands that intimidated the rest of corporate America.
Moreover, the first Obama administration was no more going to persecute Silicon Valley for not following its multiculturalism rules before the 2012 election than it would Hollywood or the universities. There were campaign contributions to collect.
Amusingly, the liberal elites who financed Obama’s reelection in 2012 had no idea that Obama’s turnout strategy of unifying his ungainly coalition of the fringes by ginning up hatred against cishet white males would rebound against them in the ensuing years.
Once the president was reelected, however, the real Obama could safely come out. Just as I had predicted in my 2008 book America’s Half-Blood Prince: Barack Obama’s “Story of Race and Inheritance” Obama’s first term was pretty sensible and his second term pretty…authentic.
The second Obama administration was free to point its resentful allies at the rich prizes in the tech industry, the entertainment industry, and academia.
Ironically, after decades of globalism, there isn’t much left to loot among Trump’s base, so now the lucrative blue-state institutions are in the crosshairs. All these highly Democratic industries have since been getting cannibalized by fellow Democrats in the ongoing meltdown of liberalism, what archaeologists might someday call the Late Obama Age Collapse. We are still watching progressives claw each other’s eyes out as they fail to peacefully divvy up the plunder.
If we are lucky, historians won’t take quite as long to document how most of the bizarre cultural panics and hate hoaxes of the past few years, such as the Haven Monahan rape fable and World War T, were inspired, if not outright rigged in advance, by collusion between the Obama administration and its volunteer PR interns in the media.
For example, by 2014, The New York Times was running a long series of articles with hate-driven headlines like:
If You Work in Silicon Valley, Odds Are You’re a White Man
A subsequent show trial intended to demonstrate that Silicon Valley was now open for pillaging was the discrimination lawsuit against a venture capital firm filed by Ellen Pao, an adventuress married to disgraced gay financier Buddy Fletcher. It was given immense publicity in the press. The New York Times “reported”:
At stake is any hope that Silicon Valley can claim to be a progressive place.
But the trial proved a fiasco and the jury gave Pao the boot.
You might think that this would stop the momentum, but little does. There is just too much money involved.
Let me close with one question about Google’s personnel policy: Compared with how you felt last week, how do you feel today about someday entrusting your life to a Google self-driving car?
The Trillion-Dollar QuestionBut of course he has zero intention of doing much of that.
Why can’t Google, with all its money, find as many women as men?
For one reason, because coding doesn’t much appeal to women. My wife, for instance, used to be a computer programmer. She was good at it, but it’s a boring job if you find people more interesting than things. Further, American programmers used to be rather well paid, but then the H-1B visa program allowed employers to substitute cheaper Asian men for American women.
Google became the second-most valuable company in the world (following only Apple, an especially white-male-led company) largely on the strength of its hardworking white and Asian male workforce. For Google to blow up $655 billion in market capitalization by taking seriously the current year’s Narrative about how diversity is our strength would be insane.
On the other hand, $655 billion inevitably attracts parasites.
It’s important to understand the recent political history to have a sense of where things are headed.
The firing of Damore for telling the truth reflects a general trend pushed by the government for a generation for shutting down free expression at work. Veteran legal analyst Walter Olson noted yesterday:
...Government pressure on employers to ban speech consisted less of direct you-must-ban mandates and more of litigation incentives. Legal or HR will counsel employer that allowing the bad speech to go undisciplined might be a Title VII offense, or evidence of one…. So as a way of evading responsibility it’s kind of brilliant. Those in power can blame private actors who in turn feel their hands tied.
...Hostile-environment law is not content-neutral. It plays favorites on topics and on sides of topics…. And speech cited in suits against employers was “frequently not at all obscene but often highly political and analytic in content.” Meanwhile, a search then [in 1997] found not “a single case in which feminist assertions have been ruled to contribute to a hostile environment.”
In truth, feminism is hostility.A few decades ago, you could waste some money on affirmative action hires, give them nice titles and offices, and often they’d happily let the real workers get back to work.
But today’s quota kids have been trained to sniff out microaggressions against their amour propre. If anybody like Damore objects, it’s proof of sexism, racism, or whatever else the government’s out to crush. The New Sensitivity is a perpetual motion machine for extracting payoffs that has evolved over decades of trial and error.
Yet for the longest time, Silicon Valley considered itself not subject to the civil rights bureaucracies and social pressures that pester the more uncool parts of the business world.
Why? Because it was high-tech and thus it was good. Disparate impact in hiring must be the result of old bad prejudices, so, obviously, futuristic tech companies shouldn’t have to worry about not hiring many women or blacks.
For decades, therefore, when Jesse Jackson intermittently tried to shake down Silicon Valley, he was routinely sent packing with a pittance and scoffing laughter. As recently as 2011, I pointed out that Silicon Valley largely ignored the diversity demands that intimidated the rest of corporate America.
Moreover, the first Obama administration was no more going to persecute Silicon Valley for not following its multiculturalism rules before the 2012 election than it would Hollywood or the universities. There were campaign contributions to collect.
Amusingly, the liberal elites who financed Obama’s reelection in 2012 had no idea that Obama’s turnout strategy of unifying his ungainly coalition of the fringes by ginning up hatred against cishet white males would rebound against them in the ensuing years.
Once the president was reelected, however, the real Obama could safely come out. Just as I had predicted in my 2008 book America’s Half-Blood Prince: Barack Obama’s “Story of Race and Inheritance” Obama’s first term was pretty sensible and his second term pretty…authentic.
The second Obama administration was free to point its resentful allies at the rich prizes in the tech industry, the entertainment industry, and academia.
Ironically, after decades of globalism, there isn’t much left to loot among Trump’s base, so now the lucrative blue-state institutions are in the crosshairs. All these highly Democratic industries have since been getting cannibalized by fellow Democrats in the ongoing meltdown of liberalism, what archaeologists might someday call the Late Obama Age Collapse. We are still watching progressives claw each other’s eyes out as they fail to peacefully divvy up the plunder.
If we are lucky, historians won’t take quite as long to document how most of the bizarre cultural panics and hate hoaxes of the past few years, such as the Haven Monahan rape fable and World War T, were inspired, if not outright rigged in advance, by collusion between the Obama administration and its volunteer PR interns in the media.
For example, by 2014, The New York Times was running a long series of articles with hate-driven headlines like:
If You Work in Silicon Valley, Odds Are You’re a White Man
A subsequent show trial intended to demonstrate that Silicon Valley was now open for pillaging was the discrimination lawsuit against a venture capital firm filed by Ellen Pao, an adventuress married to disgraced gay financier Buddy Fletcher. It was given immense publicity in the press. The New York Times “reported”:
At stake is any hope that Silicon Valley can claim to be a progressive place.
But the trial proved a fiasco and the jury gave Pao the boot.
You might think that this would stop the momentum, but little does. There is just too much money involved.
Let me close with one question about Google’s personnel policy: Compared with how you felt last week, how do you feel today about someday entrusting your life to a Google self-driving car?
for the record------the indigenous people of India are ------according to the science of
anthropology------CAUCASION-----in common parlance "white race" Race as little
REAL meaning when describing the genus/species -----Homo sapien------in common
parlance -----HUMAN BEANS
anthropology------CAUCASION-----in common parlance "white race" Race as little
REAL meaning when describing the genus/species -----Homo sapien------in common
parlance -----HUMAN BEANS
Diversity in Leftardia means you go along with their crazy views or else.Yep.Your statement just summed up what is wrong currently with our society.I don't know what he was expecting. He should know better than to express contrary thought at a place like that.
Watch every last thing you say, where you say it, when you say it, the way you say it, and to whom you say it.
After all, this is America.
.
Well, that's depressing.
The worst thing is, if you actually READ the letter, he's trying to help Google when it comes to Diversity at the company.
MindWars
Diamond Member
- Oct 14, 2016
- 42,227
- 10,743
- 2,040
- Thread starter
- Banned
- #25
I still don't understand why he sent this via email to his co-workers? I've never worked at a job where it was acceptable for employees to send their personal view on politics or social issues to everyone. Personally I don't think anything he said was that bad, but I do think it was highly inappropriate for a work environment. Unless Google encouraged employees to share their personal view on these topics? Anyone?
The tid bit I heard is most of those complaining are FEMALE GAY FEMINIST bitching about it. Most of googles employees are " gay" leftist.
MindWars
Diamond Member
- Oct 14, 2016
- 42,227
- 10,743
- 2,040
- Thread starter
- Banned
- #26
View attachment 142765
GREENFIELD: The Google Gulag
James Damore wrote a memo suggesting that Google should pursue ideological diversity, end discriminatory efforts to achieve identity politics diversity and be honest about gender differences. Danielle responded by denouncing his paper. “It’s not a viewpoint that I or this company endorses, promotes or encourages.”
GREENFIELD: The Google Gulag
James Damore wrote a memo suggesting that Google should pursue ideological diversity, end discriminatory efforts to achieve identity politics diversity and be honest about gender differences. Danielle responded by denouncing his paper. “It’s not a viewpoint that I or this company endorses, promotes or encourages.”
- Apr 5, 2010
- 80,206
- 32,288
- 2,300
Diversity in Leftardia means you go along with their crazy views or else.Yep.Your statement just summed up what is wrong currently with our society.I don't know what he was expecting. He should know better than to express contrary thought at a place like that.
Watch every last thing you say, where you say it, when you say it, the way you say it, and to whom you say it.
After all, this is America.
.
Well, that's depressing.
The worst thing is, if you actually READ the letter, he's trying to help Google when it comes to Diversity at the company.
it's not just you have to go along with the views, you have to parrot the party line word for word. Even if you agree in general, you can be cast out for not agreeing in the exact "right" way.
MindWars
Diamond Member
- Oct 14, 2016
- 42,227
- 10,743
- 2,040
- Thread starter
- Banned
- #29
Fascinating to watch all of the Trumpster snowflakes wig out about this.
Untwist your brain and you would see it is those who HATE TRUMP that are bitching over a nothing burger, and because they hate TRUMP they made it a Russian burgher
- Moderator
- #30
He got fired for publishing writing that publicly criticized his employer based on suppositions he couldn't even scientifically back up. I assure all of you had you done something similar you'd have been shown the door too.
A Google employee was fired after blaming biology for tech’s gender gap — but the science shows he's wrong
A Google employee was fired after blaming biology for tech’s gender gap — but the science shows he's wrong
- Aug 4, 2009
- 281,137
- 140,528
- 2,300
I still don't understand why he sent this via email to his co-workers? I've never worked at a job where it was acceptable for employees to send their personal view on politics or social issues to everyone. Personally I don't think anything he said was that bad, but I do think it was highly inappropriate for a work environment. Unless Google encouraged employees to share their personal view on these topics? Anyone?
I agree
Much of what he said may have been true. But TEN PAGES?
What did he think would happen?
Would everyone agree with him and change views or would his ten page opinion piece be attacked?
So if a Vegan is uncomfortable with your ham sandwich in the company lunch room, you deserve to be fired?
Yes, of course.
But if the Vegan is a Muslim then you must be beheaded.
- Aug 4, 2009
- 281,137
- 140,528
- 2,300
I have been employed in the technology field for 40 years now
While there has been some improvement in the diversity of scientists and engineers, much of the workforce remains the same as it was 40 years ago
White, male, semi-social geeks (they no longer have pocket protectors)
Asian males and females
Indian males and females
For the most part, white women, blacks, Hispanics, Jews and gays seek other professions
While there has been some improvement in the diversity of scientists and engineers, much of the workforce remains the same as it was 40 years ago
White, male, semi-social geeks (they no longer have pocket protectors)
Asian males and females
Indian males and females
For the most part, white women, blacks, Hispanics, Jews and gays seek other professions
Last edited:
- Apr 5, 2010
- 80,206
- 32,288
- 2,300
I have been employed in the technology field for 40 years now
While there have been some improvement in the diversity of scientists and engineers, much of the workforce remains the same as it was 40 years ago
White, male, semi-social geeks (they no longer have pocket protectors)
Asian males and females
Indian males and females
For the most part, white women, blacks, Hispanics, Jews and gays seek other professions
I think the other groups are working their way in, however our "2 hour movie" culture is expecting things to change far quicker than they actually will.
In Engineering fields Like Chemical, Environmental and Biochemical engineering have far more female representation than Civil, Structural and Electrical.
JimBowie1958
Old Fogey
- Sep 25, 2011
- 63,590
- 16,753
- 2,220
Google Censorship staff.
MindWars
Diamond Member
- Oct 14, 2016
- 42,227
- 10,743
- 2,040
- Thread starter
- Banned
- #37
He got fired for publishing writing that publicly criticized his employer based on suppositions he couldn't even scientifically back up. I assure all of you had you done something similar you'd have been shown the door too.
A Google employee was fired after blaming biology for tech’s gender gap — but the science shows he's wrong
That depends on whose side your mind associates with. Then there are those who understand what's really being portrayed.
iceberg
Diamond Member
- May 15, 2017
- 36,788
- 14,919
- 1,600
not being in that environment, i can't tell you. i did work for a major liberal software company for 20 years but it was *never* this bad. i didn't go nuts on my conservative nature and they didn't go nuts on their liberal side. but i did know where i worked.I still don't understand why he sent this via email to his co-workers? I've never worked at a job where it was acceptable for employees to send their personal view on politics or social issues to everyone. Personally I don't think anything he said was that bad, but I do think it was highly inappropriate for a work environment. Unless Google encouraged employees to share their personal view on these topics? Anyone?
if google is openly showing a preference for one mindset over the other, how long do you hold it in before you must say something?i would have to think someone just had enough and the pain of having to put up with that was no longer worth the gain of having a job there.
firing him, however, validated his concern.
i'll never understand the PUNISH THEM fascination from the left when someone disagrees with them.
MindWars
Diamond Member
- Oct 14, 2016
- 42,227
- 10,743
- 2,040
- Thread starter
- Banned
- #39
REVEALED: Google’s Social Justice Warriors Create Wrongthink Blacklists
Numerous individuals alleged to be members of Google’s management team have been caught bragging about forming blacklists to impact the careers of colleagues with different political beliefs.
In a series of screenshots from 2015 onwards provided to Breitbart News by a verified Google employee, individuals described as left-wing Google management employees can be seen discussing the ways they punish their colleagues both inside and out of the company.
Numerous individuals alleged to be members of Google’s management team have been caught bragging about forming blacklists to impact the careers of colleagues with different political beliefs.
In a series of screenshots from 2015 onwards provided to Breitbart News by a verified Google employee, individuals described as left-wing Google management employees can be seen discussing the ways they punish their colleagues both inside and out of the company.
- Moderator
- #40
not being in that environment, i can't tell you. i did work for a major liberal software company for 20 years but it was *never* this bad. i didn't go nuts on my conservative nature and they didn't go nuts on their liberal side. but i did know where i worked.I still don't understand why he sent this via email to his co-workers? I've never worked at a job where it was acceptable for employees to send their personal view on politics or social issues to everyone. Personally I don't think anything he said was that bad, but I do think it was highly inappropriate for a work environment. Unless Google encouraged employees to share their personal view on these topics? Anyone?
if google is openly showing a preference for one mindset over the other, how long do you hold it in before you must say something?i would have to think someone just had enough and the pain of having to put up with that was no longer worth the gain of having a job there.
firing him, however, validated his concern.
i'll never understand the PUNISH THEM fascination from the left when someone disagrees with them.
Again, the man was fired for publicly criticizing his employer's policies. If I did the same thing, no matter what the subject matter, I don't doubt I'd be fired as well. Employment is at will. It is not a right
Similar threads
Latest Discussions
- Replies
- 345
- Views
- 3K
- Replies
- 25
- Views
- 48
- Replies
- 203
- Views
- 1K
- Replies
- 6
- Views
- 34
Forum List
-
-
-
-
-
Political Satire 8039
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
ObamaCare 781
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Member Usernotes 469
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-