Slashdot Mirror

I'm not sure about "droves", but these experts seem to mostly agree with him.

These people would disagree.

This is a good place to check out.

A person who is not a white male will absolutely get paid attention to almost immediately.

That's true when discussing being stopped by police.

I'm a white male myself and I cannot fathom how some people with my same complexion cannot notice the skin colour and genital makeup of Congress, company boards and most positions of power.

This man now has become the hero of Trumpists and self-styled enemies of the politically incorrect because he proposed a series of sexist (and I use this word with great parsimony in my daily life) stereotypes which belong in the 19th century. However, it would have been interesting the reaction of the same people if he had been a muslim and proposed to install sharia in Google—which is pretty much what he was suggesting.

And oh, the irony of an alt-rightist resorting to government regulations in order to keep his job in an at-will state!

You deduced from the guy's memo that he's an "alt-rightist" and a "Trumpist"? How the hell did you do that? Did you even read the thing? You can't always choose whose "hero" you become, nor should you. I literally am as anti-Trump as you can get (and I'm white and male too), but I value science (that's one of many reasons to be anti-Trump), and all the guy said was that there are biological differences between the sexes (and that's statistical differences, not differences between all individuals, a fact that he pointed out explicitly and elaborately), and that those differences probably explain why we don't have 50% women in all tech jobs, even in the absence of any real obstacles. And he concluded that it might make little sense to try to artificially raise that number above such a "natural" limit. You may debate the conclusions (which are essentially policy proposals), but you can't reasonably debate his facts; the whole memo cites numerous scientific papers on the subject and largely reads more like a paper itself rather than just an opinion piece. Four of the scientists he quoted have responded by now,

The Google Memo: Four Scientists Respond

that should tell you something. I'm pretty sure Trump has never read a scientific paper in his whole life, nor does he want to and care about it.

According to these scientists (actual experts in the field) he's right.
http://quillette.com/2017/08/0...

Having read the article, it's clear that he was offering concrete solutions to addressing the problem of diversity and to fixing what he sees as growing issues in Google's culture. The reprints of this article apparently did not include the scientific eivdence to back up his arguments but he's on very solid footing, scientifically with his arguments. Unfortunately publishing a memo like this is like sacrificing someone's sacred cow; you're going to get an irrational knee-jerk response on par with the response of any religious extremist (because it's an ideological issue.)

The link below contain responses from scientific experts in the field who essentially back this engineers arguments. http://quillette.com/2017/08/0...

But apparently he's right...

http://quillette.com/2017/08/0...

At least according to some experts... (but I know *everyone* here on /. is an expert)

http://quillette.com/2017/08/0...

His falsifiable claims were well supported by the science. http://quillette.com/2017/08/0...

By firing him, they've created a hostile work environment for empiricists.

When addressing the gap in representation in the population, we need to look at population level differences in distributions.

-- excerpt from James Damore's memo.

This is a political idea and the theme of the memo. It's saying, we need to look to reality to understand what's going on. If you think that believing the science is sexist, then call me a sexist, but it's also a political statement to want to make decisions based on the science.

It's all old, tired arguments that have been comprehensively refuted before.

I don't think this is true. Note that I'm strongly pro-diversity and think that affirmative action makes sense, so I'm not arguing in favor of the doc's author's conclusions, but I note that all of the responses keep saying that his science was wrong... and as far as I can tell it's not. The doc itself has pretty extensive citations to current research, and the only responses I can find from working scientists in the field all state that he got the science right, with minor errors at most.

The conclusions he drew from the science are bad, because the gender and racial differences science has found are probably too small to produce the results he attributes to them.

Sure do. They've even got their ideological blacklists going on to boot. Sure is pretty authoritarian over there... Especially when people are saying well, that PhD biologist seems to have gotten it right.

After the controversy swelled, Danielle Brown, Google's new vice president for diversity, integrity and governance, sent a statement to staff condemning Damore's views and reaffirmed the company's stance on diversity. In internal discussion boards, multiple employees said they supported firing the author, and some said they would not choose to work with him, according to postings viewed by Bloomberg News.

Looks like Google decided to help Damore make his case by reinforcing their bias against differing opinion. Science also supports (mirror) his conclusions.

Yeah but distorting reality is not just about money with people, it's about power and ideology. I used ot think like you- I thought the consultations of disinterested experts would yield the best policy results. But look at what's happened in academia. There you have a petri dish of what can happen when experts are left to rule themselves. What do we have? We have a system which attacks real experts for wearing the wrong shirt at a press conference,

http://nypost.com/2014/11/17/t...

http://www.nationalreview.com/...

the systematic silencing of scientific facts and researchers by a determined minority of "Stepford Students":

http://quillette.com/2015/03/2...

who can't even grasp the basics of logical consistent thought

https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

and a "ruling class' of administrators who are either outright sympathetic to the minority of zealots or too cucky to attempt to stop them.

That is literally what academia has in fact produced in the way of an ordering principle for their own subculture, their society-in-a-petri-dish.

Do you really want ot export that to the larger society.,