/linked/2017/08/09/google-robot

Comments

Culturally appropriated:
We all agree with that.

While we're at it, why not replace reporters with Twitter scrapers?
11:58 pm — Wednesday, 9 August 2017
Enough Already:
oh holy fuck. this whole thing is insane.

regressives running around shouting 'biologically unfit! biologically unfit!' at each other as if it's a quote from the internal memo seem to have lost it. they are inventing this out of whole cloth. i read the damn thing.
12:14 am — Thursday, 10 August 2017
Gruber F. Johnson:
This idiot nor Gruber can apparently be bothered to actually read the memo.
1:49 am — Thursday, 10 August 2017
Patrick Henry, the 2nd:
Seriously, read the fucking memo Grubs. He literally states "I'm in favor of diversity". He literally explains how he wants to INCREASE it. But that doesn't fit the narrative.
2:17 am — Thursday, 10 August 2017
Patrick Henry, the 2nd:
Also this fucker complains about "white privilege" (which is BS), and yet:

>He studies at Yale University and has worked at Comedy Central and on TBS’s CONAN.

No privilege there, amirite???
2:18 am — Thursday, 10 August 2017
Gruber the Booger:
I hope Damore sues Google and wins. Big.

Just to watch the limp-dick left lose their collective shit.

"We want diversity. Just as long as you march, goose-stepping with what we believe."

-The New Left
2:47 am — Thursday, 10 August 2017
grubes:
like google has any factories at all. It's all outsourced. Obvious indication that this is Fake News, sheeple.
6:03 am — Thursday, 10 August 2017
Dangling Felcherballs:
20% of Computer Science grads are female

20% of Google tech hires are female

Where is the sexism here?
7:15 am — Thursday, 10 August 2017
To Be Fair:
>Seriously, read the fucking memo Grubs. He literally states "I'm in favor of diversity".

He does state that, disingenuously. But the rest of the words in his memo demonstrate otherwise, when he talks about women being less biologically suited to work at Google.

He's a bigoted piece of shit who shouldn't be working at a company where he has to work with other human beings.

10:36 am — Thursday, 10 August 2017
To Be Fair:
>20% of Computer Science grads are female

>20% of Google tech hires are female

>Where is the sexism here?

There are far more graduates than people who Google hires. Why do they need to employ the same percentage as the graduates?

There are as many qualified women as there are qualified men seeking jobs at Google. So why should there be any gender imbalance in their hiring?
10:39 am — Thursday, 10 August 2017
Ero:
My favourite bit from the original memo:

> Considering women spend more money than men

What planet did that ex-Googler live on? The rest of his memo wasn't much better.
1:43 pm — Thursday, 10 August 2017
jimothy:
If we were to respond to McSweeney's piece the way the hyperventilating left is responding to Mr. Damore, we'd insist that there are no differences between humans and robots, or that if there are, they have no bearing work, and to even acknowledge differences is a shunnable and fireable offense.

On the one hand, the left stresses the importance of diversity. On the other hand, they say there's no difference between men and women. If there's no difference, then a group of all men, all women, or half men/half women would be equally diverse. And who are we to assume their gender anyway?!?
2:32 pm — Thursday, 10 August 2017
anonymous:
Another day, another witch hunt with a new heretic to burn.

It's worth reading the actual memo with citations.

https://diversitymemo.com
3:32 pm — Thursday, 10 August 2017
anonymous:
So why should there be any gender imbalance in their hiring?

TBF, you fucking idiot, that is the point of the entire manifesto – which you either did not read or understand.
3:34 pm — Thursday, 10 August 2017
Anonymous®:
"I deplore generalizations. Now, allow me to dispassionately explain how we need to protect the status quo…"
4:47 pm — Thursday, 10 August 2017
anonymous:
We're going to end sexism and racism by having special classes and opportunities that are are only available to particular races and sexes.
5:02 pm — Thursday, 10 August 2017
To Be Fair:
>On the one hand, the left stresses the importance of diversity. On the other hand, they say there's no difference between men and women.

Nobody is saying that, you idiot.

It's not that there's no differences between men and women. It's just that equally qualified men and women are just as capable of doing the same jobs. There's nothing that makes one gender less "biologically" capable of doing those jobs.
11:17 pm — Thursday, 10 August 2017
To Be Fair:
> TBF, you fucking idiot, that is the point of the entire manifesto – which you either did not read or understand.

What did I miss? The fact is that there is gender imbalance in Google's hiring, and their wages.

It's nothing to do with biology, it's only due to systematic discrimination against women.

And this guy is arguing that such discrimination doesn't need to be addressed.
11:20 pm — Thursday, 10 August 2017
jimothy:
>There's nothing that makes one gender less "biologically" capable of doing those jobs.

How do you know this is true? What if there were evolutionary and biological differences that cause men and women, on average, to prefer and excel at different careers?

Would you pay any attention to such evidence, or would you reject it outright, call anyone who wishes to open such a conversation names such as "idiot," and otherwise silence such debate?

Evidently, that's exactly what you'd do, because that's exactly what you've done.

I'm not making such an argument one way or another. I'm merely suggesting that it warrants discussion, and that's what Mr. Damore attempted to do: Open discussion that the imbalance in male/female employment in technology is not *entirely* attributable to discrimination.

He cites research in biology, psychology, and sociology to back up his claims. You, on the other hand assert without evidence, that "it's only due to systematic discrimination against women."

What you've asserted is the orthodoxy. It's the only acceptable opinion. Even suggesting there ought to be a discussion concerning other explanations is heresy, and cost him his job. Those who think the orthodoxy deserves re-examination are "idiots."

But how can you be so sure your views are correct if you won't even consider other explanations?

> And this guy is arguing that such discrimination doesn't need to be addressed.

I suggest you read the memo again, because Mr. Damore most certainly is not arguing that.
10:53 am — Friday, 11 August 2017
ohm:
When the left gets up in arms about divisions of labour in nursing, teaching, Sunday School, day care, mining, garbage collecting, road construction, roofing, chimney sweeping, daredevelling, I'll roll my eyes at every single important 'diversity' demand, which appears to basically want to put women on the top of the hierarchy, in a basic population swap.

Meh.
12:14 pm — Friday, 11 August 2017
jimothy:
Here's a summary of the argument coming from TBF and his ilk:

> The only possible explanation for disparity in male/female employment in the IT field is sexism!

> Not necessarily. Allow me to present some evidence and reasoning why other factors could contribute…

> You're a sexist idiot!

On this issue, the left has walled itself off from argument and evidence while presenting no evidence or argument of its own.

They are neither open to persuasion nor willing to persuade, because anyone who doesn't already accept what they hold to be self evidently true (that is, what must be accepted without the burden of evidence) is a heretic.
2:28 pm — Friday, 11 August 2017
ohm:
@jimothy:

>On this issue, the left has walled >itself off from argument and >evidence while presenting no >evidence or argument of its own.

>They are neither open to persuasion >nor willing to persuade, because >anyone who doesn't already accept >what they hold to be self evidently >true (that is, what must be accepted >without the burden of evidence) is a >heretic.

au contraire, the left's discrediting of arguments based on classical logic, socratic methodology, and skepticism of claims, is exactly the evidence they need.

It's all about treating the offended party as 'human'.

Listen and believe is the new evidence and if you're not down with witch burnings, and if you demand corroborative and falsifiable evidence, you are one of the other, that deserves everything coming to them. And, they're not human anyway.

This trial by accusation is the gom jabbar of this instalment of what probably is best described as mob justice.
12:31 am — Saturday, 12 August 2017
Leave a Comment
To leave a comment, install the Safari extension!