Google engineer fired for diversity echo chamber memo

[Gulo Blue]

Here's the memo:

https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/3914586/Googles-Ideological-Echo-Chamber.pdf

Thoughts?

I think they should have found something short of firing him. Firing him kind of proves his point. Out of context and not considering the citations as further context, he said things that sound like advancing gender stereotypes, but most of what he said did have citations and caveats - he probably isn't even wrong.

 

[Michchamp]

Here's the memo:

https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/3914586/Googles-Ideological-Echo-Chamber.pdf

Thoughts?

I think they should have found something short of firing him. Firing him kind of proves his point. Out of context and not considering the citations as further context, he said things that sound like advancing gender stereotypes, but most of what he said did have citations and caveats - he probably isn't even wrong.

thoughts:

When I first read about this story, I thought to myself, "oh great another techbro "mens rights activist" tool wrote a pseudo-intellectual piece about women/minorities making it harder for him to get ahead (remind me who has an "entitlement problem" again?)

Then when I saw he got fired for it, I knew all the whining from the Right about "PC liberalism in Silicon Valley" would be extreme. and from the looks of twitter, this was accurate.

Then I read your tepid endorsement of it, I thought, maybe I was wrong? Maybe this is unfair? it would certainly be possible. I mean, google is a pretty nasty place, and engages in all sorts of egregious privacy practices with our personal data, anti-competitive behavior, and hordes piles of cash in tax shelters. (but because they don't openly condone firing and murdering gay people, they're "liberal" according to some). maybe this guy was calling that out?

Then after I read his article, I thought to myself "nope, I was right."

depending on how young he is, he may or may not have deserved to be fired. But then again, I wouldn't be surprised to learn something else prompted this, like a bad performance review(?), and he decided to write this memo and go out in a blaze of glory (an incredibly pathetic and lame blaze of glory).

kinda reminds me of a place I worked that had a bunch of company sponsored networking organizations, most of which were gender or racial, but some (young professionals) were open to all. there was also one for military vets. now the place was MOSTLY white males, and most of the executives and board of directors were all rich, extremely conservative white males... yet I had a coworker (white & male) who walked out of the orientation bitching about how there was no organization for "people like him." again with the sense of entitlement...

just go out for drinks after work... chances are you'll be with all other white guys, and you can network that way. and I'm sure all the execs and management thinks like you do, so you'll be fine in the end, crybaby.

 

[Michchamp]

other thought: there is just nothing more manly and tough than writing "thinkpieces" about how women and feminism are keeping you from achieving things and being a man.

can you imagine "Conan the Barbarian" doing something like that?

 

[tinselwolverine]

I don't know how this guy thought anything good could possibly have come of this.

Dude you already got the job at Google as an engineer - so how can you then whine that you're being discriminated against?

Just shut up and write the best code that you can, or whatever your job is supposed to be.
That's The best way you can continue to advance career wise.

This is the other side to coin as being overly concerned about how Jared Kushner gets into Harvard.

Shit is just the way it is. Deal.

EDIT: Of course, what this guy did is far more sort of impulsive - this guy shot himself in the foot; no one's going to hurt oneself talking about Jared Kushner and Harvard.

This is more comparable to that stupid thing with the picture of trump that Kathy Griffin did. She really screwed herself over with that.

 

[tomdalton22]

I don't know how this guy thought anything good could possibly have come of this.

Dude you already got the job at Google as an engineer - so how can you then whine that you're being discriminated against?

Just shut up and write the best that you can, or whatever your job is supposed to be.
That's The best way you can continue to advance career wise.

This is the other side to coin as being overly concerned about how Jared Kushner gets into Harvard.

Shit is just the way it is. Deal

maybe he got fired because he wrote this drivel when he was supposed to be working.

 

[Michchamp]

maybe he got fired because he wrote this drivel when he was supposed to be working.

boss says to him, "Hey, egghead, we're not payin' you ta write this crap. Ya FIRED!"

 

[Michchamp]

...

This is the other side to coin as being overly concerned about how Jared Kushner gets into Harvard.

...

I can't stand people who are that!

Say, what's your position on people who mischaracterize other peoples' arguments?

 

[Gulo Blue]

other thought: there is just nothing more manly and tough than writing "thinkpieces" about how women and feminism are keeping you from achieving things and being a man.

can you imagine "Conan the Barbarian" doing something like that?

He's not going for manly. At one point he suggests allowing men to be more feminine to shrink the gender gap.

 

[byco42]

A guy got fired cuz he pissed off management. This used to be "Thursday." Now, it's news. But it's not, actually.

 

[Gulo Blue]

A guy got fired cuz he pissed off management. This used to be "Thursday." Now, it's news. But it's not, actually.

I think he got fired because it became news.

 

[Michchamp]

also: anyone who believes Silicon Valley or these scorched-Earth, win-at-all-costs-and-monopolize-the-market tech companies "have a liberal bias" is an idiot. they were only made possible by Reagan's pro-big business agenda in the 80's (and continued all presidents since then). they're emblematic of the worst excesses of capitalism. the fact that they pay lip service to supporting a handful of liberal causes (ones that have already more or less gained mainstream acceptance) doesn't make them progressive or even liberal.

the author of the piece starts out with erroneous assumptions, and gets more wrong from there.

 

[byco42]

I think he got fired because it became news.

It became news because everything is now.

 

[Gulo Blue]

It became news because everything is now.

Agreed. 15 years ago, he could have sent this to his small group and that would have been the end of it.

 

[tinselwolverine]

I can't stand people who are that!

Say, what's your position on people who mischaracterize other peoples' arguments?

Well I was 99% goofing on you but then I realized obviously that a more direct comparison would be Kathy Griffin, because your observations that maybe Jared Kushner got into Harvard for reasons that might not be especially fair, and everybody who responded, "well that's kind of the way things just work…" In both cases it was innocuous and no blood no foul.

This guy and Kathy Griffin, they both screwed themselves over big-time.

 

[Michchamp]

Well I was 99% goofing on you but then I realized obviously that a more direct comparison would be Kathy Griffin, because your observations that maybe Jared Kushner got into Harvard for reasons that might not be especially fair, and everybody who responded, "well that's kind of the way things just work?" In both cases it was innocuous and no blood no foul.

This guy and Kathy Griffin, they both screwed themselves over big-time.

well, the main thing I was going with there was to highlight the hypocisy of people who cry about affirmative action being "unfair" but have no qualms about people like Kushner Sr. buying their way in to the same schools over kids who may be more deserving on merit.

 

[Gulo Blue]

well, the main thing I was going with there was to highlight the hypocisy of people who cry about affirmative action being "unfair" but have no qualms about people like Kushner Sr. buying their way in to the same schools over kids who may be more deserving on merit.

I'm pro-AA, but I don't think there's any hypocrisy. If people thought you should get in strictly on merit alone and they held those positions, ok, but people aren't as socialist as you. If you think you should be able to get in on merit or wealth (which you should) then there's no hypocrisy issue here.

 

[Michchamp]

I'm pro-AA, but I don't think there's any hypocrisy. If people thought you should get in strictly on merit alone and they held those positions, ok, but people aren't as socialist as you. If you think you should be able to get in on merit or wealth (which you should) then there's no hypocrisy issue here.

I don't quite follow...

if you think a policy which, all else being equal, gives preference to a minority is unfair, yet one that gives preference to someone who's parents decided to cut a check on the DL is okay, I think that's clearly hypocritical.

not talking about buying a consumer good here... universities - even private ones - get public money. not just directly... also research grants, student loans, etc.

 

[Gulo Blue]

I don't quite follow...

if you think a policy which, all else being equal, gives preference to a minority is unfair, yet one that gives preference to someone who's parents decided to cut a check on the DL is okay, I think that's clearly hypocritical.

not talking about buying a consumer good here... universities - even private ones - get public money. not just directly... also research grants, student loans, etc.

I don't follow either. You over-simplify when you say it's not a consumer good. There's no conflicting morals here. Whether or not something can be purchased is unrelated to whether or not it can also be earned by merit and through what means. I don't see the clear link you see.

 

[Michchamp]

I don't follow either. You over-simplify when you say it's not a consumer good. There's no conflicting morals here. Whether or not something can be purchased is unrelated to whether or not it can also be earned by merit and through what means. I don't see the clear link you see.

I'm kinda surprised by your view on this.

one of the arguments against affirmative action has long been that "unqualified" minorities are getting into schools to the exclusion of "qualified" whites. But if you're rich and unqualified, and you buy your way in... no concerns there? no hypocrisy in bashing AA, but shrugging at this other form of meritless admission?

to me it exposes the arguments against affirmative action for what they are. it's not about any concern that colleges are producing incompetent graduates, or admissions are not as much of a meritocracy as advertised; just that one policy benefits someone they don't like, and the other doesn't.

 

[Gulo Blue]

I'm kinda surprised by your view on this.

one of the arguments against affirmative action has long been that "unqualified" minorities are getting into schools to the exclusion of "qualified" whites. But if you're rich and unqualified, and you buy your way in... no concerns there? no hypocrisy in bashing AA, but shrugging at this other form of meritless admission?

to me it exposes the arguments against affirmative action for what they are. it's not about any concern that colleges are producing incompetent graduates, or admissions are not as much of a meritocracy as advertised; just that one policy benefits someone they don't like, and the other doesn't.

You're focusing on just one of the arguments and then assuming everyone adheres to it? Since everyone can't go to school, merit is ideally one of the biggest factors in determining who goes, but there are reasons to make exceptions. People don't agree on merits, there are several types of diversity that add value to the school, and there's the obvious practical benefit when you admit rich kids. Weighing how much value each brings and to what degree it constitutes merit is an independent argument for each case and they change with time. One position here doesn't make you a hypocrite there.