Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

I never said that he "said" that, I said he "considered" it. My evidence? Right here:

"Hiring practices which can effectively lower the bar for “diversity” candidates by decreasing the false negative rate"

It doesn't matter whether he cites sources and tries to rationalize his position. He's in no place to be making these kinds of broad, overarching statements.



What does that mean to you? What do you think he's saying? Since you read the memo carefully and as charitably as you can, and not just scooped a quote from a news article about the memo, you will know that it's in the context of this bullet list:

> I strongly believe in gender and racial diversity, and I think we should strive for more. However, to achieve a more equal gender and race representation, Google has created several discriminatory practices:

> ● Programs, mentoring, and classes only for people with a certain gender or race [5] ● A high priority queue and special treatment for “diversity” candidates ● Hiring practices which can effectively lower the bar for “diversity” candidates by decreasing the false negative rate ● Reconsidering any set of people if it’s not “diverse” enough, but not showing that same scrutiny in the reverse direction (clear confirmation bias) ● Setting org level OKRs for increased representation which can incentivize illegal discrimination [6]

> These practices are based on false assumptions generated by our biases and can actually increase race and gender tensions. We’re told by senior leadership that what we’re doing is both the morally and economically correct thing to do, but without evidence this is just veiled left ideology that can irreparably harm Google.

> [5] Stretch, BOLD, CSSI, Engineering Practicum (to an extent), and several other Google funded internal and external programs are for people with a certain gender or race. > [6] Instead set Googlegeist OKRs, potentially for certain demographics. We can increase representation at an org level by either making it a better environment for certain groups (which would be seen in survey scores) or discriminating based on a protected status (which is illegal and I’ve seen it done). Increased representation OKRs can incentivize the latter and create zero-sum struggles between orgs.

I'll note, as you no doubt know from your reading of the memo, that your quote has a link that requires a google email to open. I'm not sure what it says.

If you read that carefully and charitably, without mindreading (he "considers" indeed), it reads like a political conservative, and not someone upset about "diversity hires" per se. You can disagree with him. I do, regarding affirmative action, but you cannot, given that quote, draw a conclusion that he thinks women are biologically inferior.

I'm not sure how "We can increase representation at an org level by making it a better environment for certain groups (which would be seen in survey scores)" squares with your notions about the memo.

Ok, I don't think any of that will change your mind about the memo or Damore, so feel free to have the last word.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: