Google in Deep Goo
- Thread starter SkyRider
- Start date
I skimmed the one guy's so-called "manifesto" and, while I don't agree with everything he says, there's a lot of meat there.
He suggests we should promote a diversity of opinion, rather than pursue diversity quotas based on superficial factors (gender, skin colour, etc.). 100% agree.
He suggests there are biological differences between men and women which may make each gender more suitable to specific roles. Again, I 100% agree. Notice, he doesn't say a gender should be forced into specific roles, just that in general each gender may show more aptitude for different ones. Basically, let's advocate for equal opportunity for those who express enthusiasm in whatever field, rather than try to force through people in order to obtain equal representation.
He says the political echo chamber that silences dissenting opinions prevents honest discussion. Google basically proved his point by firing him.
His manifesto is an intelligent review of what he feels is wrong with Google's direction. It certainly doesn't come off as the rambling of a sexist, but more of a pragmatist, which he equates with Conservatism...something he says Google doesn't tolerate. Again, Google proved his point by turfing him.
There are other areas where I disagree with him, but that's only natural in any debate. The main takeaway I took, one that I think is incredibly important in this day and age, is that he's saying to treat people as individuals, not as groups. Martin Luther King Jr. had the same idea. We idolize him. But demonize this Google employee. What a world!
He suggests we should promote a diversity of opinion, rather than pursue diversity quotas based on superficial factors (gender, skin colour, etc.). 100% agree.
He suggests there are biological differences between men and women which may make each gender more suitable to specific roles. Again, I 100% agree. Notice, he doesn't say a gender should be forced into specific roles, just that in general each gender may show more aptitude for different ones. Basically, let's advocate for equal opportunity for those who express enthusiasm in whatever field, rather than try to force through people in order to obtain equal representation.
He says the political echo chamber that silences dissenting opinions prevents honest discussion. Google basically proved his point by firing him.
His manifesto is an intelligent review of what he feels is wrong with Google's direction. It certainly doesn't come off as the rambling of a sexist, but more of a pragmatist, which he equates with Conservatism...something he says Google doesn't tolerate. Again, Google proved his point by turfing him.
There are other areas where I disagree with him, but that's only natural in any debate. The main takeaway I took, one that I think is incredibly important in this day and age, is that he's saying to treat people as individuals, not as groups. Martin Luther King Jr. had the same idea. We idolize him. But demonize this Google employee. What a world!
Our universities used (past tense) to be the same way. An open discussion on matters of import. Now it seems that SJW have taken over and only their opinions count. The reason why professors have tenure is so they can talk openly and honestly and do research that don't always support popular opinion.
BTW: Apparently, the fired guy is getting job offers from competitors.
He wrote a manifesto outlining why he believed women are unfit to work at Google. Not firing him would leave Google open to accusations of being a poisonous work environment.
His basic argument was "the average woman is biologically unfit to work in tech" but you can make the exact same argument for the average man. The number of people who are fit to work in tech--it's single digits of the population. Not everyone is a nerd.
I thought Google was now known as Alphabet Inc.
Writing that irrational, irrelevant sexist diatribe seems like the ultra-nerdy computer engineer wanted to be fired, I don't know what else he expected to happen.
Writing that irrational, irrelevant sexist diatribe seems like the ultra-nerdy computer engineer wanted to be fired, I don't know what else he expected to happen.
That's the opposite of what he's saying. He starts off dividing people into those with Left Biases and Right Biases. Then he generalizes that "Men engineer like this, but women engineers are inherently inferior, and engineer like like this.
To me his call for 'more diversity of opinion' means he wants to be able to be state his sexist beliefs openly at work.
Yeah he'd fit right in at Fox News LOL.
Guys, be careful out there. There are now more ways than ever to get fired.
The Lululemon founder got fired because he said not every woman looks good in yoga pants. True, but the truth didn't save him.
The Firefox guy got fired because he voted the "wrong" way in a gay marriage referendum.
Of course, Colin Kaepernick is unemployable because he claims blacks are treated unfairly in these United States.
The Lululemon founder got fired because he said not every woman looks good in yoga pants. True, but the truth didn't save him.
The Firefox guy got fired because he voted the "wrong" way in a gay marriage referendum.
Of course, Colin Kaepernick is unemployable because he claims blacks are treated unfairly in these United States.
canada-man
Well-known member
http://dailycaller.com/2017/08/08/corporations-remain-the-biggest-threat-to-free-speech/
Corporations are a threat to free speech.
Corporations are a threat to free speech.
Alphabet is the parent company of Google and a whole bunch of other smaller firms.
I also don't understand what this guy hoped to accomplish with this memo. Why be the flag bearer for this issue? People seem to forget that a company pays you to do your job, not to criticize their policies. Work somewhere else if you don't like the policies or keep your head down and get paid. Or start your own business so you can dictate policy.
http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2017/08/08/facts-supplanted-propaganda-wherever-look/
Or read this...
https://libertyblitzkrieg.com/2017/...rd-an-overdue-conversation-part-2-the-firing/
I wish the trolls around here would at least take the time to read an article before commenting. You really lose credibility. Surely your employers are paying you to at least be a decent schill. Try to live up to the companies manifesto would you.
Or read this...
https://libertyblitzkrieg.com/2017/...rd-an-overdue-conversation-part-2-the-firing/
I wish the trolls around here would at least take the time to read an article before commenting. You really lose credibility. Surely your employers are paying you to at least be a decent schill. Try to live up to the companies manifesto would you.
"Truth is the first casualty of political correctness."
One example: They fired the founder of Lululemon because he dared to say that not every woman looks fantastic in yoga pants.
No, I believe you are wrong. I can understand how you could get that impression from the coverage it has got and if you merely skimmed his manifesto. But I'd suggest taking the time to read it fully, without prejudice and see if you come to the same conclusion.
He does indeed divide people into groups, and suggests each group has positives and negatives. But he does so in order to say that we shouldn't focus on promoting underrepresented groups, because those groups being underrepresented may be a symptom of a natural, lesser aptitude in that area and not of discrimination, and that we should instead treat everyone as individuals based on their aptitudes, whatever they may be. If a woman shows great aptitude in tech, that's absolutely fine. But actively recruiting underrepresented groups in a specific field is a waste of resources and, frankly, creates an unfair advantage based on superficial characteristics (ie gender), rather than based on skills and ideas.
"Defend affirmative action...fight for equality"
The level of ignorance to not understand those are two opposing forces boggles my mind.
Typical (((fuji)))
Doesn't take much internet research to view the document in its entirety. Everything he said was backed up by scientific fact. Here are some helpful links for you!
https://beta.theglobeandmail.com/op...ttps://www.theglobeandmail.com&service=mobile
http://www.breitbart.com/tech/2017/...o-demote-anything-non-pc-from-search-results/
Here is the full document, if anyone praising google for firing this man wants to actually read it, instead of just reading a CNN spin of what he actually wrote.
https://www.google.ca/amp/gizmodo.c...-10-page-anti-diversity-screed-1797564320/amp
He is incapable of thinking outside the box. There is a bunch of them on the Board and in the broader society who are like lemmings. They all subscribe to a fixed philosophy regardless of evidence to the contrary.
I read it. See the part I already mentioned?
Neuroticism (higher anxiety, lower stress tolerance).This may contribute to the higher levels of anxiety women report on Googlegeist and to the lower number of women in high stress jobs.
He is a software engineer. Writing and posting this psycho-social gibberish is not part of his job. It is obvious from his blathering and your support that men have a difficult time sticking to the task at hand and job they are hired for, have an inherent need to offensively and obliviously "mansplain" even when not wanted or needed. They cannot help it, it is part of their nature.
Men who become software engineers generally are anti-social, awkward around women, unaccepting of 'others', and let bad thoughts mix with testosterone and stew around in their brains when they should be working. It is a flaw of their gender.
TL, DR: Dude needs to get laid.
Similar threads
