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

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

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.

coffee_cake

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

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?

PopePalpatine

Wombatman wrote: »

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

Well, Stefan Molyneux said it so it must be true! Also, did you know there's a cultural Bolshevist Marxist plot to brainwash us through tinned pasta?

Silver Lynel

PopePalpatine wrote: »

Well, Stefan Molyneux said it so it must be true! Also, did you know there's a cultural Bolshevist Marxist plot to brainwash us through tinned pasta?

Is everything Stefan Molyneux says untrue?

Or is everything he says true?

It's just I'm not sure if I can dismiss someone outright because someone else told me to.

I can imagine you saying "if Stefan Molyneux said the sky was blue I'd go outside and check". The sky IS blue though.

So again we are back at taking sides.

You would probably say "he has an agenda and twists the truth to serve it". You don't do that? Come on now.

You would probably say he spreads misinformation but on the other hand I feel like you would apply peer pressure to have people believe a thing without finding the full truth of the situation.

What if I don't want to take a side?

Why should I respect your opinion over the opinion of Stefan Molyneux?

Let's be honest here, the purpose of posts like this are to encourage people to pick a side or to "preach to the choir".

What have you got to offer someone who doesn't know who to trust?

seamus

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.

This.

If you read the thing it comes across as a pseudo-scientific analysis of social dynamics, attempting to derive engineering solutions to social and emotional problems.

This is especially apparent in his summation of women, "on average". Apparently they're more neurotic, value feelings over ideas and prefer to be agreeable rather than assertive.
He views these things as discrete, universal, measurable data points as opposed to fluid properties with causes and effects of their own.

If I had to guess, he's somewhere on the spectrum and has difficulty communicating with anyone in a way that's not unnecessarily analytical and a little condescending.

This is a surprisingly common trait in successful tech companies, because they hire people way outside the curve and with engineers give more weight to raw ability than interpersonal communications.*

Totally aside from this thread, it would be worth doing a study of the whole left -v- right thing as it equate to emotional and logical perspectives.

One thing that's become apparent to me from the whole 4chan/Trump thing is that there appears to be a very strong correlation between far-right conservativism and the hallmark traits of autism - fear of change, difficulty with social interaction, emotional immaturity, OCD/repetitive behaviour.
Likewise, looking at the far-left you see a lot of romantic idealism, excessive compassion, irrationality, short-sightedness when it comes to fixing problems, lots of discussing rather than doing, lack of focus, less attention to detail.

If someone undertook a dispassionate look at the traditional spectrum, it might be possible to better understand why people tend to lean left or right, why others go to the extremes and build a better understanding then of how the two can develop a way to meet in the middle rather than continually consider one to be superior to the other.

*This is not a bad thing necessarily. But people still have to work in teams, so there needs to be ways to communicate, whether that be a buffer (i.e. manager) or through personal development courses for the individual

seamus

Silver Lynel wrote: »

Why should I respect your opinion over the opinion of Stefan Molyneux?

Past form?

We all subconsciously rate the opinion of others. If it's someone you've never interacted with, such as you and I, then you'd probably rate it neutrally. Let's say zero.

If you've interacted before and found them informative, enjoyable or plausible, you'll automatically appraise future interactions with a positive bias before you even read them.

On the other hand, if you found them harsh, uninformative or implausible in the past, you'll probably automatically view their opinions negatively.

This is not necessarily a bad or unfair thing. People who are often wrong, will probably be wrong again. People who are often right, will probably be right again.

Thus Molyneux, with a long record of preposterous claims and poorly considered arguments, should have his opinions treated with the appropriate level of skepticism and value, which would be below the value you would place on the opinions of someone with whom you've had limited interaction.

Thus, the opinion of a total stranger on the Internet should garner more respect from you than the opinion of a well-known spoofer like Molyneux.

_Kaiser_

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.

And yet again the liberal "side" show that the guy has a point - rather than constructively counter-argue the points the guy raised, just call him names instead :rolleyes:

Wibbs

Silver Lynel wrote: »

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

Some parts might be arguable, but overall he has his head square up his arse.

Forget the "gender war" bulls1t for a second, how he views engineering is an issue. He views it from the point of view of a nuts and bolts programmer with Sheldon Cooper level thinking. The stereotypical (usually male) nerd **** to black and white hard sums that makes them feel better. This is even more in play in IT. In reality, yes you need those people to actually build the stuff at the nuts and bolts end, but you need the people who come up with it in the first place and those who make the idea work for people who aren't coders. If IT had been left to the nerds of this type we'd all be still working computers with a command line interface. Or we wouldn't because we, most of us, wouldn't be arsed.

Most of all, that he decided to fire this missive out internally shows a monumental lack of awareness, insight and cop on. Again full Sheldon Cooper going on. I'd have fired the muppet for that alone. Even if everything was "100% right". Regardless of his opinions that stuff would make the day after bloody awkward for all from a purely practical business standpoint. For a start what woman would want to be a part of his team, or god forbid under him in the chain? She'd be thinking and rightfully "just because I have tits he is automatically assuming my lack of worth in this position/I got it cos quotas". Or the men who aren't coding type geeks would be thinking eh hang on... I wouldn't want to hang out with, never mind work with a muppet, man or woman, that is that unaware.

silverharp

seamus wrote: »

Totally aside from this thread, it would be worth doing a study of the whole left -v- right thing as it equate to emotional and logical perspectives.

or self interest, looking at the US scene the internet leftists tend to look like they are low in the social pecking order so its logical that they want a system that props them up regardless of effort. the anti leftists tend to focus on personal ability and want system where they are free to prosper and therefore want things to be more merit and free market based

Sonics2k

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

And yet again the liberal "side" show that the guy has a point - rather than constructively counter-argue the points the guy raised, just call him names instead :rolleyes:

Yes, it's called an opinion.

Much like he has the right to believe that women are biologically inferior to men in the field of coding (lol), so is the rapper B.O.B. in his right to believe that the Earth is flat.

However, with that right comes my right to say that one is a dickhead, and the other is a moron.

And also, let's not act as if the Right side don't have their fair share of people who jump to insults, "cuck" and "snowflake" appear to be their go to at the moment.

TheDoc

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

And yet again the liberal "side" show that the guy has a point - rather than constructively counter-argue the points the guy raised, just call him names instead :rolleyes:

As someone who is not "liberal" and would be considered generally conversative I found his memo total nonsense and garbage.

The absolute irony of how he talks about political leanings, and yet describing himself as in the same box as say me, but yet I'd disagree with this so strongly.

He displayed an ungodly misunderstanding of his own job role and leads me to believe he is likely a relatively young, low level engineer who actually has no tangible experience in terms of collaboration or proper engineering, and his assumptions based on gender and various other assumptions that he portrays as facts(with some laughable percentage use) is just incorrect, fundamentally breaking how arguement.

There really doesn't need to be any mature response or debate on it, because his memo was an all encompassing cluster****.

I'll sympathise that maybe he was getting rubbed up the wrong way in terms of the training and maybe preachy policy that he might constantly view or be forced to, in a general left/liberal company/region, but there are avenues to properly address and flag those.

Doing a brain dump(a pretty poor one) is just a shocking move from someone working in a company like that.

If I was working in a startup in the most "everyones idea is a good idea" and a real inclusive, flat org structure and someone on my team dropped that, I'd march them out the door

seamus

silverharp wrote: »

or self interest, looking at the US scene the internet leftists tend to look like they are low in the social pecking order so its logical that they want a system that props them up regardless of effort. the anti leftists tend to focus on personal ability and want system where they are free to prosper and therefore want things to be more merit and free market based

Perhaps. Though from my perspective the anti-leftists are the ones who are low in the pecking order and blame the left for keeping them down. Possessing an inflated sense of self-worth that's not reflected in their actual social status.

But yeah, certainly self-interest could be a factor where people gravitate towards the "side" that would appear to be the most personally beneficial to them.

silverharp

another thing to find slightly amusing here is that Google which is essentially an advertising company has a whole AI system based on discriminating its audience into male and female

SterlingArcher

seamus wrote: »

Perhaps. Though from my perspective the anti-leftists are the ones who are low in the pecking order and blame the left for keeping them down. Possessing an inflated sense of self-worth that's not reflected in their actual social status.

But yeah, certainly self-interest could be a factor where people gravitate towards the "side" that would appear to be the most personally beneficial to them.

Yes those same people I'd call ignorant. Lemmings don't have opposing views. which is why they all walk off the cliff hand in hand.

I'm sure there are plenty of people that think yay it's good Germany have introduced this new "hate speech" law. It's great that google are censoring people with conservative views. All the while never even considering how quickly that gun can turn on them. How they have helped craft the very noose that may someday wrap around their own necks.

The short sighted man strides confidently around the bear trap, as he walks Into the bears cave.

Chips Lovell

I've worked with a few oddballs who've had "interesting" views on gender and/or race. None of them were stupid enough though to write it all down in a memo and circulate it among colleagues.

Luxxis

He got fired.

The patriarchy must be on VACA this week.

Grayson

SterlingArcher wrote: »

Yes those same people I'd call ignorant. Lemmings don't have opposing views. which is why they all walk off the cliff hand in hand.

I'm sure there are plenty of people that think yay it's good Germany have introduced this new "hate speech" law. It's great that google are censoring people with conservative views. All the while never even considering how quickly that gun can turn on them. How they have helped craft the very noose that may someday wrap around their own necks.

The short sighted man strides confidently around the bear trap, as he walks Into the bears cave.

They're not censoring anyone. They're saying that certain speech isn't acceptable in the workplace. That's always been the case, in every job. Stop playing the martyr.

Dyr

When an engineer writes something like that you critique and refute it in the same fashion

Of course the diversity police weren't going to do anything like that, it might start a debate and debates don't work well when your viewpoint won't survive them

just shriek outrage and have him drummed out of google for wrongthink

Hopefully he cleans google out in court and we start to see some sort of pushback against this toxic entryism

TheDoc

Grayson wrote: »

They're not censoring anyone. They're saying that certain speech isn't acceptable in the workplace. That's always been the case, in every job. Stop playing the martyr.

Exactly.

Whatever way they want to portray themselves, or however people want to put the company on a pedestal, this is still a private company, whose purpose if to generate revenue and profits.

I think if anything the guy involved here got too sucked into the "more than a company" nonsense some tech companies portray and completely misread the situation.

Absolutely mental. I know a good few people in google, had first hand experience of their interview and recruitment process and while its an extremely tough and gruelling process, and they are incredibly selective, they do still seem to let some absolute idiots through the net into their company. And some absolute socially warped people

Bob24

Grayson wrote: »

They're not censoring anyone. They're saying that certain speech isn't acceptable in the workplace. That's always been the case, in every job. Stop playing the martyr.

That's precisely censoring. Most organisations do it indeed. Hypocrites call it code of conduct when it applies to their policy but censorship when what's being flagged as unacceptable doesn't suit their views, but it's the same thing.

The question is what views are being censored and does it make sense.

wes

Bambi wrote: »

Hopefully he cleans google out in court and we start to see some sort of pushback against this toxic entryism

You sweet summer child, look into the concept of "at will" employment in the US. "At will" employment is something that conservatives in the US are big fans of, and btw they had cause to fire him, as his "manifesto" violated employee guidelines. He has 0 ground to sue, and you can be damn sure that Google checked with there lawyers before letting him go.

Any lawsuit would be laughed out of court.

Sonics2k

Bambi wrote: »

When an engineer writes something like that you critique and refute it in the same fashion

Of course the diversity police weren't going to do anything like that, it might start a debate and debates don't work well when your viewpoint won't survive them

just shriek outrage and have him drummed out of google for wrongthink

Hopefully he cleans google out in court and we start to see some sort of pushback against this toxic entryism

Have you actually read what he was saying?

Bob24 wrote: »

That's precisely censoring. Most organisations do it indeed. Hypocrites call it code of conduct when it applies to their policy but censorship when what's being flagged as unacceptable doesn't suit their views, but it's the same thing.

The question is what views are being censored and does it make sense.

They are not censoring him, they have simply stated they do not wish to have someone with his particular views as part of their company.

He is still free to write this inane gibberish in a variety of other places, and I assure you the people at the likes of The Blaze will be more than happy to give him a platform to spout the dribble that pours from his fingers.

Let's be honest, if he said the following

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

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

Let's remember that not too long ago, people were literally saying this kind of stuff about black people in the US, and not long before that people were saying the same about the Irish.