Diversity At Google Hasn't Changed Much Over the Last Year (cnet.com)

An anonymous reader quotes a report from CNET: Not much changed at Google over the last year when it came to the diversity of the tech giant's workforce. Google released its annual diversity report on Thursday detailing the composition of its workforce. The percentage of female employees rose by .1 percent to 30.9 percent. The percentage of Asian employees grew by 1.6 percent to 36.3 percent. The number of black and Latino employees grew by .1 percent to 2.5 percent and 3.6 percent, respectively.

"Google's workforce data demonstrates that if we want a better outcome, we need to evolve our approach," said Danielle Brown, chief diversity and inclusion officer at Google, in the report. "That's why from now on ownership for diversity and inclusion will be shared between Google's leadership team, People Operations and Googlers. Our strategy doesn't provide all the answers, but we believe it will help us find them."

Comments

Re:Who Cares?

[Anonymous Coward]

If you don't want to give up your job to a less qualified minority, then you are a FUCKING RACIST.

Re:I'm pretty sure there was a memo/manifesto on t

[AmiMoJo]

I wish they would get on with the lawsuit. Get all the arguments and expert evidence out there.

Damore's main issue was that he tried to claim he had a better understanding of the science he cited than the people who wrote the papers. He wanted to rely on their findings but draw his own conclusions. Deliberate or otherwise that's a classic tactic used by actual sexists to justify their actions, which turned some mistakes into a serious problem.

Re: Who Cares?

[c6gunner]

This is almost as retarded as when that one group of Christian idiots put together a list of something like 700 scientists who don't believe in evolution.

Yeah, Sherlock, you can always find exceptions. You have to be a moron to think that you're actually proving anything, though.

Re:I want Google to be very 'diverse'

[AmiMoJo]

I had to bring the signature back. This is a new level of SJW panic ridiculousness.

Re:I'm pretty sure there was a memo/manifesto on t

[AmiMoJo]

His main actual sin that I saw was that seemed to be leaning to heavy on claims of the difference between genders being biological, when we are much better able to measure the cocktail of nature and nurture.

Yeah, that's basically it. Interesting that we said the same thing and you were modded "insightful" while I got "troll".

The authors of the studies he cited have publicly refuted his conclusions. That's bound to come up in court. He is going to have a hard time justifying his position as rational and science based when the scientists whose work he is relying on contradict him.

But the memo is still quite readable if one operates under the assumption that traditional management and business structure is garbage that is heavily biased in favor of "rugged invididualism"-type affluent men.

Yes, although he also seems to think that Google is the opposite of that at the same time... But in any case, the suggestions he makes are sometimes in line with what Google is actually trying to do, namely change the culture and make the environment less hostile. But he also opposes programmes with a proven track record of fixing those issues, because of reverse-sexism.

It really seems like he wrote that memo with little understanding of historic efforts to address these problems or of the decades of study done around them, which resulted in rather fundamental mistakes and him dragging up a lot of long debunked ideas that are now exclusively used by genuine sexists. It's a shame he didn't do more research... His selection of sources looks very much like the result of a google search for papers supporting his established view which he then skimmed rather than trying to carefully understand in context.

Re:Who Cares?

[stealth_finger]

Where the fuck do you get "Christian" from? White male, yes (in the US and Europe), but the vast majority of computer scientists I've met are atheist—particularly the white, male ones. Obviously the field attracts people who tend to be very analytical and rational. Of course you get the occasional religious freak, but it's rare.

Maybe your social circle is limited, or maybe you aren't widely read.

Books in Print by Donald E. Knuth - 3:16 Bible Texts Illuminated - Things a Computer Scientist Rarely Talks About

Bacon, Bayes, Euler, Galileo, Leibniz, Maxwell, Newton, Pascal, Riemann . . . I could go on. I doubt you will illuminate STEM in the way they did, and they believed in God. It seems atheism is not a requirement for rational thinking, let along science and mathematics. That is a conceit that seems to be popular on Slashdot, but there is little to it.

List of Christians in science and technology

It really does take a lot to get some people out of the brainwashing they recieve a child. There is not a single thing about the god story that makes sense and any adult who truly believes it is either dealing with some serious cognitive dissonance or is actually a fucking idiot.