Slashdot Mirror
Leaked Video Shows Google Executives' Candid Reaction To Trump Victory (theguardian.com)
A number of Slashdot users have shared a leaked Google video from Breitbart, revealing the candid reactions of company executives to Donald Trump's unexpected victory in 2016. The Guardian summarizes: In an hour-long conversation, Google co-founders Sergey Brin and Larry Page, chief executive Sundar Pichai, and executives Kent Walker, Ruth Porat and Eileen Noughton offered their reflections on the election, sought to reassure employees about issues such as immigration status and benefits for same-sex partners, and answered questions on topics ranging from filter bubbles and political polarization to encryption and net neutrality. The executives' reactions ranged from the emotional to the philosophical to the purely pragmatic. Porat appeared near tears in discussing her open support for Hillary Clinton and her father, who was a refugee. Walker discussed global political trends toward nationalism, populism and xenophobia. Pichai noted that the company was already "thoughtfully engaging" with Trump's transition team. While Breitbart argues the video shows evidence of Google's inherent bias against Republicans, Google says the executives are simply sharing their "personal views" and that it has no political bias. It does beg the question, should politics be discussed in the workplace? Longtime Slashdot reader emil writes in response to the video: [...] Disregarding the completely inappropriate expression of partisan views in the workplace, the video claims that "history is our side." These executives appear to have forgotten the incredible tumult in the distant past of the U.S. The last election was not an electoral tie that was thrown into the house of representatives (as was the election of 1800). The last election did not open a civil war as happened in 1861 when Lincoln took office. The last election did not open war with Great Britain, and will likely not precipitate a new set of proposed constitutional amendments to curb presidential power as did either of James Madison's terms in office (War of 1812, Hartford Convention). There may be a time for tears, and a time for hugs, but that time cannot be in the workplace. Most Fortune 500 employees took the news of the latest president elect with quiet perseverance in their professional settings regardless of their leanings, and it is time for Google to encourage the same. "At a regularly scheduled all-hands meeting, some Google employees and executives expressed their own personal views in the aftermath of a long and divisive election season," Google said in a statement. "For over 20 years, everyone at Google has been able to freely express their opinions at these meetings. Nothing was said at that meeting, or any other meeting, to suggest that any political bias ever influences the way we build or operate our products. To the contrary, our products are built for everyone, and we design them with extraordinary care to be a trustworthy source of information for everyone, without regard to political viewpoint."
Political views are part of life. I don't need Emil to tell me what is appropriate to discuss and what is not. In fact, it is inappropriate for /. to push this stupid silencing agenda. As long as a discussion is respectful, it is appropriate everywhere.
I'm not a complete idiot... Some parts are missing.
what about when the south park writers shit there pants after trump won.
I look forward to all the complaints and demands for the government to punish Google.
I expect a lot of them will be from the same people who insist that neo-nazis should be allowed to post on YouTube because of the First Amendment.
They tried to help the other candidate so hard — by getting the Latino voters (but not other minorities) to the voting places... And achieved so much ... Only to be disappointed:
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
Now I know the group-think is breaking up.
Rest assured, the unanimous and deeply entrenched political views of Google's executive leadership will in no way affect the services they offer or their employees' decisions.
The last election did not open a civil war as happened in 1861 when Lincoln took office.
"And Google showed anti-Republican bias then, as well." -- Abraham Lincoln
Trump's campaign rhetoric really scared the crap out of many people. And not in a "OMG, Republicans nonsense!" way. In a "Are we going to start having to hide Muslim families in our basements?" way.
At this point, I think the main thing protecting everyone is the sheer incompetence and disorganization of his entire administration. Its clear now that he's far more interested Tweeting and continuing to hold those campaign rallies than in actually doing the job of President.
There's so much active silence of center to conservative voices. You must support the DNC stance, or you disappear - online for now, anyway.
What kind of authoritarian nightmare are groups like google trying to push?
Walk away.
So what?
A large group of youngish, diverse, highly educated, intelligent technologists were dismayed at Trump's election.
I fail to see anything surprising.
I'd be equally unsurprised by the (likely) positive mood at a morning sales meeting at a southern Indiana John Deere dealership.
Was her Dad a legal refugee / immigrant?
The libs love to lump everyone in together.
“Trump hates refugees.”
Sorry Porat, that’s not true.
I wonder what she thinks today.
Trumps done nothing to hurt her precious refugees.
Really stoking the fire today, msmash and BeauHD. That may be too much. Maybe you should have featured this political rubbish for tomorrow morning?
Where can one go for true information these days? On the war in Syria, most media reports don't capture the real truth.
They do not "force" government to tell the truth.
In fact, this administration, fearing the loss of leverage in Syria, now says it knows Assad will use chemical weapons.
They do not mention that what Assad will be doing is what the American government did in Mosul, Iraq, or that Aleppo is now in relative peace after Assad established sanity there.
Besides, Damore's piece wasn't "conservative" by any rational definition of that word.
Would you argue it was liberal? What wasn't conservative about it? I guess it wasn't advocating for a pre 21st century outcome. He actually expressed the desire to increase female participation so it could be interpreted as progressive / liberal but it expressed the opinion that differences in outcomes among genders was due to fundamental differences between genders which is the traditional 20th century since beginning of time view.
I watched pretty much the whole thing rather than reading excerpts. I thought it was an interesting window into the tech world and Google world specifically right after the election...
The video is meant to show bias, and it does - but it also shows at that point at least some expressed that there should be a willingness to listen to opposing views, a feel that now seems to be utterly gone from the left and also for Google internally where it is safe to identify you gender as Dragon, but not safe to identify as a conservative.
One thought that occurred to me as the Google employees and execs were having Q&A was - there was talk about inequality and low information voters. But both of those notions are way too simplistic.
One of the Google employees even brought to light the contradiction of the supposed "low information voter" by saying they consumed a lot of "fake news". Well that is MORE information, not low. And the reality is that a lot of what was considered fake news by some, was not really fake at all. In fact the reason Trump won was because we live in a high-information world now, where all of the people can understand the political class as a whole are scum rather than believing the truly Fake News that has been pushed on us for decades about all Washington politicians.
On the subject of inequality, it strikes me that people always refer to this in the financial sense. But most people do not care if someone makes more than them - otherwise why would we idolize music and movie stars? The inequality that is dangerous, is more the inequality of power not money - that is, the power over your own life. So many times we see people at high levels of government or business or really anything, get away with stuff where we know we would be in jail or worse. At the same time rules from those same people control more and more of what we are allowed to do personally. THAT is the kind of thing that leads to true resentment, a dangerous force.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
I'm a conservative and I liked what I read. Do I have to turn in my card?
The Citizens United ruling gave corporations the right to express political views. If you don't like it, you'll have to overturn that ruling with new legislation (and potentially an amendment).
I feel like the current administration only likes it when the laws work for them, and want to ignore laws that are inconvenient for them. It's the sort of crap that dictators of a banana republic try to pull.
(not AC because clearly non-partisan. i.e. hopefully I pissed off everyone)
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
Right, should rephrase that to "you're free to express your views as long as your views don't challenge our prevailing far-left orthodoxy".
I bet the Chinese citizens could ask Google if they are biased in favor of their authoritarian government and Google would reassure them that they are not.
China. Where we will cave to the regime and build it just the way the government wants.
Yeah republicans whine about anti-conservative bias, but aren't you trying to dictate what private individuals can say in a private business's private meetings??
Kind of like how Donald Trump chanted "lock her up" while he committed high treason, colluding with Russia's attack on America. And how he's now working to protect Russia from consequence while laying down our country's defenses against continued Russian attacks on America....
All this talk about politics in the workplace has to stop. Number one on that list? Reporters like Breitbart. From now on, no more talking about anything political. It has no place in the workplace.
Mi discounts the popular vote because Mi is not an American. Her love for Trump is greater than her love for truth or America's institutions. Get rid of the treasonous cunt.
Google seems to waste a non trivial amount of resources kvetching about politics and SJW dogma. Maybe that's a good thing. Otherwise they'd be even more evil with their privacy slurping products.
In any event, I've finally done away with google search. duckduckgo is my primary with bing as a backup. Now I just have to move away from my gmail accounts - easier said than done.
While Breitbart argues the video shows evidence of Google's inherent bias against Republicans, ...
Breitbart arguing about inherent bias.
It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
Google is a private business. There are certain things they can't do (racial discrimination, age or gender discrimination) but overall, they can do whatever they want and they can be as biased as they want. Just as Fox News is extremely biased and constantly bashes Democrats.
And that's the way it should be. Private businesses have the right to be biased assholes, regardless of whether that bias is liberal or conservative. And that's why James Damore deserved to be fired. Not because he expressed a conservative opinion, but because he isn't smart enough to understand that the First Amendment applies to government, not private business.
With all due respect to user emil, his comments reflect his views. Quiet professionalism at other companies reflect those companies cultures; the more personal reactions at Google reflected their culture.
They look and act like they are nine years old.
They need to grow up!
they are literally crying.
there's nothing candid about it. This would have been a carefully prepared statement. It would be far more interesting to have a video of them talking about Trump in a boardroom meeting.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
If Google is claiming that this video merely expresses the employee's "personal view", why are they using company assets to make a company video, during company time, during a company review seminar?
Why do they need to make a company video to "reflect" on the political outcome?
I'm sorry google, you're full of shit. This isn't a personal view, this is a company view.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2018/08/01/president-trump-has-made-4229-false-or-misleading-claims-in-558-days/ - Oh yeah, the "fake news" was so inaccurate, tsk...
Once again it's "super tolerant" Kendall the known liar asserting that "the left" is intolerant as a blanket statement, AGAIN and AGAIN and AGAIN ad nauseam... sure, distract away from Trump's nazism and authoritarianism, however you can...
Linking to Breitbart is a new low!
Then they probably just changed their underwear and went on with life just like the rest of us.
Honestly I went to bed that night not caring because I knew she had a lock in and I voted for whom I wanted (which was neither of the popular options). When I woke the next morning and saw the news, I though it was a joke until I confirmed the results on several new sites. Then I thought, well at least the next four years will be entertaining to watch. So far I haven't been disappointed as I like to watch the pain of others.
Well, they did so realizing what a gold mine a Trump presidency means for the comedy industry.
"I just believe in doing what's right." by c6gunner on Thursday January 28, 2010 @05:20AM (#30931014) you caught impersonating apk is 'the right thing' you punk https://linux.slashdot.org/com... cuz APK challenged you to show you do better work and you can't after you tried to mock him you loser https://linux.slashdot.org/com... . You're online trash c6gunner. Shit bag cowardly fake name trash online.
I doubt they laughed THAT hard.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
APK you're a hypocrite. You ran from a challenge c6gunner put to you after you mocked him https://linux.slashdot.org/com... worse you had to alter the words of others that like, use and praise HIS work https://linux.slashdot.org/com... like a childish moron would. You with nothing to show for yourself but a fake name online no less. You're disgusting.
Four spam replies from you in 10 minutes. Damn, that's a lot of butthurt, APK. Grow up and STFU.
expressed the opinion that differences in outcomes among genders was due to fundamental differences between genders which is the traditional 20th century since beginning of time view.
This is also the view that has never been toppled by physical evidence, so why would it be radical or outrageous?
"For over 20 years, everyone at Google has been able to freely express their opinions at these meetings"
Right!! What a laugh. I'm sure if someone walked up there and said "I'm so happy, Donald Trump will be our President" they might not have walked out of there alive.
No way in that meeting could you freely express your opinions.
And with trump running on anti-immigrant plank, those employees need reassuring that Google won't just cave on them. Same for LGBTQ who they also employ and trump campaign hate for. So, yeah, not seeing a problem here. Were you all pissy about Fox being pissed off when Obama won, twice? No? They, unlike google, have the claim of news reporting to bolster their biases and bigotries.
The far right argues that a non-living businesses has religion and therefore are not subject to various regs.
Now, they are arguing that a business should not have the rest of first amendment, even when it is just inside of the business.
I hope that SCOTUS gets a case out of this. It should be interesting to see what will happen.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
When someone has actual proof of Google actually censoring things, and not just someone who's clueless about SEO or can't understand that no one gives a shit what they have to say, I will be willing to listen. Until then, in the words of the late George Carlin: Fuck 'em in the asshole with a big rubber dick! Then break it off and beat 'em with the rest of it!
c6gunner we know that's you. The quote of you saying you do what's right is a blatant lie if you think impersonating apk with your name on the post twisting slashdotters praise of apk's work is right. You started with him and your own stupidity is finishing you off. Apk ought to thank you for you being so stupid imho.
Yeah. If they were in shock after the elections they weren't alone. Most of the world, in fact most of the USA as well, felt the same.
It doesn't "beg the question." It raises the question. Begging the question is a logical fallacy that occurs when an argument's premises assume the truth of the conclusion, instead of supporting it. It is a type of circular reasoning and an informal fallacy.
Support a few technologists in Washington.
Governments havenâ(TM)t been significant gatekeepers on the flow of information in most western countries for decades, if not centuries. So if free speech legislation only applies to governments and not at all to massive private entities that today hold significantly more weight in that area, then the legislation is as good as useless and needs to be reformed.
LOL! Your MacOS URL is broken. So much for the MacOS version you've been spamming about for months. You're an embarrassment and you know it. You'll probably try to cover up your failure by lying and claiming that you're being impersonated. That's typical for you, APK.
Ok. Please point out which of my 16 words referenced the First Amendment.
I'll give you a hint. None of them did.
TBH, any view expressed that was pro-Trump, much less "neutral", even on day one post-inauguration (by which time he'd clearly demonstrated a large number of unsavory behaviors and views) contributes only to the growing understanding that Google is evil; both in its corporate aims and in its corporate culture.
And every day since day one has only made that more clear.
Say, this reminds me of an old Soviet joke... It is about a Soviet and an American arguing, which country has better Freedom of Speech protections.
The American says: "I can openly shout: 'Reagan is an asshole!' — and I will not be prosecuted".
To this the Soviet answers: "Big deal, I can call Reagan an asshole too — and I'll even be praised for it!".
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
How many investors knew Google is a branch of the DNC?
Seems like a cult.
You got me to look at the troll. No congrats.
I think the insight question in this story is whether or not the google is supposed to help seek the truth or just tell people what they want to hear, even when they are seeking evidence to support false beliefs. Do YOU think there IS such a thing as the truth? If so, then you might even see the question as a struggle between good and evil--and it looks like evil is winning. Not just in American society, but within the google itself.
I actually described and predicted this problem about 15 years ago, though my terminology was "pandering to the users" rather than "personalizing the search results". If the goal is to maximize profits, then the causal chain is quite clear: Profits come from advertising and advertisers always want more eyeballs, but the google would lose eyeballs by offending them with truths that they would prefer not to see. Ergo the google had to give up the truth when it annoyed proudly ignorant fools or faith-based fanatics, which describes two YUGE chunks of Trump voters.
I think there are constructive solution approaches. Even more strangely, I think that Slashdot used to be a place where such solutions could be discussed. Hain't seen no evidence lately.
Go ahead. Ask me about MEPR or guest voting. I dare ya!
Freedom = (Meaningful - Coerced) Choice != (Speech | Beer^2), and sad sock puppets' bad mods avail them naught.
God? No, no. Let me quote the relevant part to you, with emphasis:
No doubt at all that "God" is on the side of the conservatives, right along with the tooth fairy and the easter bunny.
Don't be evil was too hard? ... I don't think that means what they think it means. Their values don't always align with my values, though many times we do agree.
They kept talking about "their values"
When upper management talks one-sided-politics at an all-hands meeting, there is an issue. If the meeting was after work, 100% voluntary, and multiple political points of view were displayed ON THE STAGE, then I'd have less complaint.
So google ... get back to working on the mainland China google stuff, since "don't be evil" is too hard. Be certain you have your values in mind while doing that.
Too powerful and too joined at the hip with Democrats.
Corporatism != Free Market
It's like I am watching a mash up of 1984, Lord of the Flies, and Animal Farm. Every dystopian novel about surveillance, mind control, and free speech. They violated there motto of don't be evil. What I saw reminded me of the way all the people around Kim Jong-un looks like. Stalin used to kill the first person that stopped clapping. Absolute power corrupts absolutely.
It seems as Google has violated campaign finance law and I suspect they did more to molest the election illegally than the Russians. The Washington AG has sued both Facebook and Google. There will be more laws that they broke brought to light by the lawyer of James Damore.
Oh. Some people don't share our "values." How awful.
Best part: we'll use our AI tech to "reach" those knuckle-draggers and educate them. LOL. At what point does such vast ignorance measure intellect?
Someone leaked this; a secret soul that has to exhibit the necessary group-think but actually despises these weird freaks and their intolerance.
Imagine the witch hunt that must be under way right now.
Maw! Fire up the karma burner!
Hello Mr. Pot, It's Kettle here.. You are black with soot too sir...
Force everyone to be pro-conservative the way the good Lord intended. #MAGA
Meanwhile, they work with China to censor Chinese citizens, just like Apple.
On the homefront, they are an extension of the leftist party (the Democrats). Both have worked together to create Orwellian "hate speech" policies that allows them to label anyone they don't like as racist, sexist, xenophobic, hateful, etc. Then, they use that to take people off their platform.
It looks like the leftists have hijacked classical liberalism and redefined it to where the loonies run the asylum (e.g. social justice warriors).
https://youtu.be/tlIjMJBSnRE
I mean, not for nothing, but the Google executives turned out to be exactly right about Trump.
https://theconcourse.deadspin....
And further, so fucking what if every Google executive later dropped their pants and took a giant shit into a MAGA hat? What's it to you? Go use fucking Bing and stop whining like little bitches just because the people running the most powerful corporations in the world were smart enough to realize that 304 racist electors had just installed the most corrupt president in modern history who would go on to bring shame on our nation and weaken us in the eyes of the entire world.
You are welcome on my lawn.
A large group of youngish, diverse, highly educated, intelligent technologists were dismayed at Trump's election.
The "so what?" part is that this group of young, almost entirely white (seriously, go to 16:56 where they are having the audience do a group hug - two black guys in a sea of mostly white males), "intellectuals" (read: credentialed elite) control a great deal of what most people see, especially on topics others may not be familiar with and are searching for more information. They also can view a great deal of what most people say through many channels - including private channels like email.
So to find them leaving so far away from a centrist position is disturbing. They talked about a lot about what half the country thought, while hardly thinking "hey almost no-one here seems to represent the other half, I wonder if that might be an issue" (one person there did express that conservatives a Google were afraid to out themselves which was a great sign how for the slant has gone).
Representation matters. Especially when you wield that much power over people's lives and understanding.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
T is a rude arrogant narcissist (among other things) to a degree that overwhelms his party affiliation. Why the hell should anyone expect people to be happy about such as a President?
Table-ized A.I.
Is wanting to slow down economic and social justice. Been that way since Burke.
It's one thing to advocate for lower taxes / different tax structures and smaller government, that's a debate worth having and there are nuanced views even on the far left. It's another thing to insist that "girls are stupider than bros" with shoddy mathematics or that "racism is over, just get a job ghetto kids" or that "gays are icky and must be kept in the closet". So google bro pushes around some standard shoddy mathematics and gets slapped down and the snowflake-right screams "bias!". There's way more to being an enterprise engineer than optimizing the algorithm. Interacting with their global services by wrapping everything in whatever that xml-ish query language is is going to require also not being a jerk. Just because the product manager is a hot Asian chick doesn't mean that white male engineer should roll his eyes at having to listen to a girl. And if the tranny SRE makes white male engineer nervous perhaps change the porn browsing habits (not on the work network of course)
I don't agree with all the campus thought policing, I think most of it is wasted energy, but these children that you spit on as they try to change their world are immune to your consultations. And good on big silicon, and Nike and Ford, for getting on the right side of history - even if the motives are mostly pure long term brand loyalty.
Would you argue it was liberal?
I'm the AC you're responding to. I know I shouldn't be floored by this question, but I am.
It is a sad indictment on our modern political discourse that everyone's default assumption is that any political opinion must fall into one of these two categories.
I remember when everyone on Slashdot understood that "liberal" and "libertarian" were both kinds of "progressive". Today, extremism is apparently mainstream and "centrism" is apparently a synonym for "false equivalence".
It's a hard world out there for people who want to make up their own minds and, Eris forbid, maybe have different opinions on different issues rather than falling into a partisan clusters. I'm not a pro-lifer, but I feel bad for people who are, since there is no mainstream party that is consistently against abortion, capital punishment, gun violence, and war.
What wasn't conservative about it?
It did not advocate for protecting or preserving traditional values or traditional institutions.
MALA!
Table-ized A.I.
- Companies reflect the vision, and biases, of the leadership.. - Spending corporate assets to promote the agenda of the leadership is done by every company, big or small. - Agendas are always bias driven. - For the media: the stronger the claim of presenting the "unvarnished truth", the greater and more rigid the bias behind the words. - To dream of a nirvana where no bias exists is ludicrous, and a denial of the human condition. In the dim past, when I in high school, our English 12 teacher brought in copies of several different newspapers. We were tasked with comparing articles written about the same major event of the day in each. It was an eureka moment for me: the realization that the reported news is fact coloured by personal or corporate bias. Hardest to detect: those biases that reinforce your own personal biases.
I disagree on the direction people are being pushed - I follow a LOT of independently minded people on Twitter, who are not left or right wing, but actually have different views depending on the subject.
Almsot all of them are way more moved to the right, even to the point of sometimes defending Trump even though they might despise him.
The left has become the most puritan fascist force I have ever seen. Over my life I have voted for every party but there is no modern Democrat I can possibly hope to endorse, because they are just over the moon with violent rhetoric, and the desire to impose control over voters. Why would I want any of that? They claim to be on the side of love but all I see from the leftward forces these days are endless waves of hate, really turning off those of us in the middle happy to embrace the fact that everyone will have different viewpoints and that is OK.
It's also true the right has gotten crazier as well. Just not nearly AS crazy, and only in some aspects instead of a totality of wacky.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
They said Trump doesnt represent their values but apparently censoring in China is keen? Speaks volumes the hypocrisy.
Ill say one thing. Trumps election has cleared the lines of where all the socialists stand. They cant hide from people like they once could. If only we could censor all that free speech...
That the algorithm was developed with bias towards conservatives. I will keep an open mind. And yes, I am conservative. Now, as far as individual reviews. Yes, I do think the major social media is biased and bigoted towards conservatives.
Anonymous comments are as pathetic as the anonymous "sources" that contaminate gutless journalism from the New York Time
I'm sorry there's a misspelling you said conservative event racist I know it's easy to confuse when you're that dumb.
The card that says "RightwingNutjob"? Nah, you can keep using that one. But if you have a conservative card, presumably an expired one, you probably shouldn't flash it around.
How in the name of everything that's reasonable and is there a post from Infowars Breitbart the company that has been banned from both Twitter and YouTube as well as Facebook and somehow getting a post here.
And yes I watched the video and you know what I felt exactly the same way when I saw the election results. I'm a member of the LGBT and I was horrified to realize just how many people were willing to go out and support someone as terrible as Donald Trump. Someone who's openly hateful of my very existence and yet they voted for him. This isn't about conservatives Or democrats this is about racist and non-racist. Stop trying to lump all Republicans in with your hate rhetoric and speech. You're freaking monsters.
After all, nobodfy doubted that whatever Mark Fuhrman said reflected on the even-handednes of the LAPD.
Showing disgust at the election of a faithless, bigoted womanizer who hasn't a shred of decency is not partisan.
I saw some rich foreigners whom would not be able to buy some key policies from Congress. Today, most of Silicon Valley is foreign born. If the USA didn't have the wealth and markets, they wouldn't have come here. The USA doesn't need any more disloyal foreigners.
"At a regularly scheduled all-hands meeting, some liberal Google employees and executives expressed their own personal views in the aftermath of a long and divisive election season, while conservative employees kept their heads down so they wouldn't be Damored,"
You want the government dictating to people what they have to say? Then move to North Korea and enjoy your totalitarian bullshit. Don't forget to enthusiastically show your support for the dear leader or your will be locked up or killed.
Lol, nobody praises fatass incel APK, other than himself, the rest of Slashdot regards him as in irrelevant shitposting troll. Get back on your meds and leave the discussion to the adults.
Yeah, Clinton has active with his male part. W was a loyal husband, whom occupied Iraq for ~7 years, at a cost of $1 trillion. So, skirt chasing acceptable. Hard on occupations, not so much.
I think they were just pissed that it ruined the plan they had for the season. Suddenly, a lot of plot threads or other things fell apart (the joke about Bill being the first gentleman and having a first gentleman's club with Bill Cosby lacked the punch it would have otherwise had) and couldn't go anywhere and you could tell that they hadn't planned for Trump to win. No one who wasn't an extreme Trump devotee really did.
There is one workplace where you are not allowed to discuss politics, no discussing politics at the White house.
Not in California.
Rob
"We want to encourage diversity of ideas."
JAMES DAMORE
"Whoopsie!"
Man they need an AWFUL big shovel for all that bullshit.
Chas - The one, the only.
THANK GOD!!!
He never went public.
Others whose feelings are that gender is entirely a social construct and there is no psychological gender felt he is a heretic for proposing changes that'd make employment at google more attractive to people with a female mindset is a better way to attract women to google than the approach then in place. They started a whisper campaign against him and escalated that into a public shaming for wrong think. Much of that criticism accused him of writing things not contained in his memo anywhere. That was a smear campaign meant to create mob justice, which worked.
I'm not reading any of this because of all the JOOOOOOOOOOS controlling my mind.
Wow! Look at all the thoughtful discussion that ensured. Not.
Not even a query as to whether it is fair to categorize "search results" as the kernel of the google's "corporate soul", whatever that might be. By the way, I think the other Slashdot-front-page google story about the resignation is joined at the hip there...
However, even without Slashdot's help (or perhaps I should say with the help of an imaginary audience that no longer exists on Slashdot), I did realize one more aspect of this topic. Or should I reword that as "something that I knew but didn't say explicitly"? Perhaps ever?
You could analyze it as two cases:
Case (1): There is a truth related to the search query. In that case it seems clear to me that the results should favor that truth even when the google believes the searcher won't like it. Actually, especially when the searcher hates the truth. In general most queries about "established" scientific topics do have a clear consensus about the truth. For example, it is a harmful disservice to help a smoker find the last guy who still claims cigarettes are good for you. (And NO, it is NOT evidence against science that the doctors had to be forced to change their minds on that topic. One of the essential features of science is to learn over time.)
Case (2): There is no single result that addresses the search query with "high truth". In that case the results should reflect the range of results. If anything, the results the searcher seeks should be contextualized in some meaningful way, but you can bet today's google will never do it so rationally because it would offend the losers. Imagine something like "Here are the five primary answers that seem most relevant to your query. Group 1 answers are estimated to have a 37% probability of being most accurate, Group 2 is at 21%, Group 3 has 9%, Group 4 is 7%, and Group 5 is at 5%. All of the other answer categories are below 5%." If the google did something like that, then the only happy campers would be the people who like Group 1, eh?
From this perspective, the dismay at the googlers over the triumph of the Anti-truth Trump is intuitively obvious to the most casual observer. The only surprising aspect is that the dismay was concealed for so long.
Freedom = (Meaningful - Coerced) Choice != (Speech | Beer^2), and sad sock puppets' bad mods avail them naught.
Per my second comment on this topic, I realized that "dismay" is a key word, but it was only mentioned in a handful of comments on the story, and yours was one of the two moderated as insightful. If I ever got a mod point...
I do think you raise an interesting new point about the google's dependence on international recruiting. To rise to the level of insight I think you'd need to go at least a step farther on the aspect of physical presence versus Internet-moderated tele-presence.
However, as I already wrote, I think the key was Trump's anti-truth perspective. That had already become abundantly clear by the time of the election. Of course pro-truth people felt dismay--but I would say the corporate google has become much more evil since then and probably doesn't even feel so sad. The soulless machine is just finding new ways to seek larger profits in a smaller-truth environment.
Freedom = (Meaningful - Coerced) Choice != (Speech | Beer^2), and sad sock puppets' bad mods avail them naught.
They are redefining what it means to be a bad citizen.
They are not a private company. They are a public company and they must live up to different standards under the law than a private company.
Feel free to express a liberal view to the Trump White House.
See what you get.
How do I know when someone is an idiot? When they think Trump has been influenced by Russia, when Trump has done many things against Russian interests (just ask 300 dead Russian mercs).
What everyone should be looking at, but seemingly no-one is - the Trump-China connection.
Oh well, maybe someday you'll be smart enough to get it!
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Jews hide this post of verifiable fact. They censor anyone pro Trump/pro USA, Soros caught funding divisory groups + Google/Facebook/Twitter censoring too. A historical pattern dictatorships use + bread & circuses + seizure of media/communication, finance/banking for fake news + creating seize the youth, seize the future (stupid millenials of today are the proof) since they are easily influenced possessing no wisdom being given false or incomplete histories. All through federal funding of education at state levels for indoctrination, not education (education only fit to make laborers out of the unwashed masses jews call goyim in their false sense of superiority yet they cut their noses off in rhinoplasty trying to be the "inferior goyim" proving they themselves KNOW they are the thieving inferiors known as crooks all through history nation to nation they are banished from). JOOgle itself is merely a watchdog on YOU goy cattle's patterns so they can inject fake news and censorship to HERD YOU - hence all the tracking. Read on:
Khazar Talmudic Jews believe this of all they call goyim/gentiles (any non-jew): Jews = biggest racists of all for which they "jew guilt" you for no less! They're hypocrites known as thieves all thru history or were Argentines in the 1940 under Peron, Spanish inquistion, France (1306), Egypt (despoiled/robbed by jews), Arabs (pre & post 1948), England (1330 Edward longshanks), Romans under titus, Russia pogroms and Germany who got rid of them from their nations nazi german's too? No. Driven into DESERTS ages ago! Don't wonder why after all those exilings above.
Should anyone doubt any of this see Jacob Javits' crony Rosenthal spill the beans on it https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D4zMVZ8HnFI/ where he called all Christianity fools for helping Israel and the biggest scam of all time per their beliefs below from their Talmud.
This is the province of the synagogue of Satan (Pharisees whom Jesus Christ himself kicked to the curb out of the temple & they killed him for it. Jeremiah did the same to them also + the Essenes could not stand them either breaking away from the pharisee corruption):
Jew Talmud excerpts (the book that calls Christ's mother a whore & a bastard of a roman soldier):
1. Sanhedrin 59a: "Murdering Goyim is like killing a wild animal."
2. Abodah Zara 26b: "Even the best of the Gentiles should be killed."
3. Sanhedrin 59a: "A goy (Gentile) who pries into The Law (Talmud) is guilty of death."
4. Yebhamoth 11b: "Sexual intercourse with a little girl is permitted if she is three years of age."
5. Schabouth Hag. 6d: "Jews may swear falsely by use of subterfuge wording."
6. Hilkkoth Akum X1: "Do not save Goyim in danger of death."
7. Hilkkoth Akum X1: "Show no mercy to the Goyim."
8. Choschen Hamm 388, 15: "If it can be proven that someone has given the money of Israelites to the Goyim, a way must be found after prudent consideration to wipe him off the face of the earth."
9. Choschen Hamm 266,1: "A Jew may keep anything he finds which belongs to the Akum (Gentile). For he who returns lost property (to Gentiles) sins against the Law by increasing the power of the transgressors of the Law. It is praiseworthy, however, to return lost property if it is done to honor the name of God, namely, if by so doing, Christians will praise the Jews and look upon them as honorable people."
10. Szaaloth-Utszabot, The Book of Jore Dia 17: "A Jew should and must make a false oath when the Goyim asks if our books contain anything against them."
11. Baba Necia 114, 6: "The Jews are human beings, but the nations of the world are not human beings but beasts."
12. Simeon Haddarsen, fol. 56-D: "When the Messiah comes every Jew will have 2800 slaves."
13. Nidrasch Talpioth, p. 225-L: "Jehovah created the non-Jew in human form so that the Jew would not have to be served by beasts. The non-Jew is consequently an animal in human form, a
I must admit that given what i'm watching and listening to now on the session, it seemed to be more of an issue in extreme disappointment in who was chosen as president, not the party or political lines.
... not over a political party. It expressed concerns over the candidate who won and his generally rash and almost random trial and error approach to everything. Trump has shown throughout the past two years of office that other than manipulating people to build one of the world's largest monuments in history with his name on it, his approach to politics is to just wing it and then just throw some duct tape on. I'm not 100% sure this is the wrong way to handle politics, but he's not nice to people he should be working with but disagrees with. He's actually really mean and he alienates people who he should be embracing. There's nothing wrong with saying "Dude, I love you... you're great! Now, understand, I'm going to make this change and if I'm wrong, you can say I told you so, but I have to try this". Instead, he simply lashes out and attacks.
I am absolutely disgusted by the state of both major political parties today. Consider that there were dozens of candidates that made it quite far down the road in this election. And yet, when it came time to go to the polls, the American people were left with only two candidates because of the failed system.
You asked an excellent question. "Would you argue it as liberal?". I think that it's not an issue of whether it's conservative or liberal. I think that the issue is that we attempt to demonize one or the other. It is no longer socially acceptable to be a little bit of both. For example, what about a if you're a wealthy white Christian male who goes to church every Sunday, prays, but also believes it's not his right to have a say on abortion whether he approves of the action or not and also drives an electric car because he believes in global warming. This is a person who is clearly by today's standards someone who no longer has a home in America. See, that person is required to be either conservative or liberal though the liberals are probably against his economic and family policies. And saying you're Christian in Silicon Valley is such a big thing that there are TV shows about how big a thing this is. Yet, that same person could never express their more liberal beliefs out loud in a place like Texas.
American has polarized and things like Turducken is considered not only something fun to say... a lot, it's also entirely normal and acceptable. Yet, the human turducken which is a little bit of a mix of everything is no longer allowed because it's not within lines with the American way which is "Please stand in box A or box B... pick a side... you're either part of the solution or part of the problem... etc..."
This video expressed concerns
This is a man who came into the presidential office with such thin skin that he can't handle the attacks made against him by American corporations who exist only by the ability to churn and spew controversy... meaning the press. The news papers are in the business of selling news papers and because Trump is so incredibly outlandish, they can sell A LOT of them. Because of systems he himself strongly embraces and exploited extensively to become the president in the first place by using those systems against his opponents, the entire news world has transitioned from reporting facts and news, to publishing a great deal of supposition as well as opinions. News outlets have always shared their opinions. Walter Cronkite was an excellent example of an altruistic man who would break down and cry when something moved him and his voice and sincerity would move the entire world. But today, we don't publish this. We publish articles that take pot shots. They perform hit and run journalism with a focus on writing the headline that will sell today's paper.
Consider a news source like "The Register" who has a policy of writing absolutely nonsensical headlines as click bait. I've been reading them
said he would. He gutted unions, which today any credible economist will tell you is why wages are in decline (they call it "collective bargaining" because Union's a dirty word these days). He was the one responsible for stock buy backs. That was a crime before him. Companies weren't supposed to manipulate their own stock price. That lead to CEOs paid in stock which created the distorted market we see today where companies do mass layoffs and unnecessary outsourcing to get short term bumps to stock that translate into money in the CEO's pocket. He also created our homeless problem by shutting down the insane asylums. And then there's how he got elected. He made deals with terrorists to keep Americans hostage to make the Dems look weak. That's not me being a Nut Job, that's a matter of fact. I don't understand why that's not a bigger deal...
Romney ran Bane capital and presided over them while they picked successful companies clean. During the election a bunch of folks working in a pharmaceuticals factory came to him to see if he'd save their jobs. He called the cops on them and had them escorted off the premise. That's how little regard the guy had for workers.
Bush Sr could have been a lot worse. So I'll give you that. But he gave us Bush Jr, and dear lord was his presidency a disaster. There are kids who have never known an America at peace getting ready for college thanks to him. And the 2008 market crash. To be fair it was Regan's deregulation and Clinton continuing it that caused that. But Bush Jr (and Sr) knew it would happen and both could have stopped it.
My point is the left has been right. Over and over again we've been right. Fat lot of good it's done us. Being right doesn't feel good. And it doesn't make anyone else feel good.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
It seems that 80% of the population uses the phrase "begs the question" to mean "raises a question that needs an answer." We've all heard it used that way, but the other 20% knows that phrase actually refers to a logic mistake. (See Wikipedia.)
The problem is, if you use it correctly, most people won't understand your meaning, and if you use it incorrectly, some people will recognize your ignorance. Ignorance is correctable. This post is intended to help correct it some small way.
Wisdom dictates avoiding phrases that confuse people or fail to successfully communicate.
While I'm on the subject of things people misunderstand, and posting anonymously, here are some other things you might not know or should think about:
This post brought to you by your local reluctant grammar nazi. Doubtless I've made several errors in this post which you're gleefully waiting to point out. Please feel free to reply with your corrections; I won't read them.
One more thing, everyone should read Wikipedia's list of common misconceptions once a year.
Right and Left politics is obsolete. Whilst people might be complaining that CEO X said that or no-one likes politician Y the real issue is that we pay attention to these people at all instead of the office they hold. This is a major sign that Capitalism is breaking down.
Let's look at the real political systems that exist as there is only two Capitalism and Feudalism. What MrKaos where is Communism in this? Well the reality is Communism is a means to convert Capitalism into Feudalism and whilst I know what I am saying is really controversial and will probably get me modded down, Western culture has to adapt to survive because it is valuable and important. The other systems suck.
The only way to do that is to look at things, where we are, realistically instead of with the traditional Left and Right Idealism.
What is called "the Right" has been lapooning Liberals which, ironically, is a key component of driving Capitalism with creative thinking and entrepreneurial activities, like starting businesses, establishing them. Right wingers run those companies which is why they are conservative.
Cult of personality, static wage growth, low inflation, lack of social mobility, lack of immigration mobility, these are all signs of Feudalism and the collapse of Capitalism - this is not something I think is good at all and I'm only pointing it out because I hope people will pay attention.
Capitalism is optimized for the few based on the assumption that the capital they earn will be redistributed throughout the economy. However when that capital is hoarded the market gets vicious because less capital is available, people are terrified and switch to survival mode and Feudalism with its misery, is optimized for everyone and looks more inviting. Welcome back to the middle ages.
Don't believe me? Right now we hear discussions about Trump this or Brin that we ignore that this very discussion is a sign of Feudalism and how engaging in a such a polarized political debate with zero emphasis on economics is a sign that Capitalism is in its death throws.
This is not a good thing.
My ism, it's full of beliefs.
I demand that APK prove that this was not posted by him.
Uhhh yeah about that, Google was given start up funding by the NSA, so sorry but horseshit. In fact if you look at most of the now "too big to fail" corps like GOOG,FB,APPL, etc you'll find government funding or sweetheart deals during their early phases so..."private" business my ass, unless crony capitalism is a free market I call horseshit.
ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
SJWs are in the minority here... they are over-represented mainly due to AmiMojo and PopeRatzo, who probably have multiple accounts. Most of us just want to do real work to help out real people who really needs help.
In Google, you can say "kill all white men", and you will be praised for it.
As if the banks, corporate polluters and every other human-killing group wasn't shouting to the rafters when Dotard was "elected" with Putin's help. I want to see some of *those* videos; I;m sure they're out there. And frankly, even though Google probably doesn't the tripe that comes from the far right, I think they. Speech may be "free", but the truth is expensive, especially when it is subverted by the lairs, cheats, and scum in officialdom who are supporting Dotard.
SJW seems to be a made up category for the purposes of hate.
“There may be a time for tears, and a time for hugs, but that time cannot be in the workplace”
Dont mess with democracy!
Ronald Reagan's favorite jokes (cleaned up a bit, of course). Go on YouTube and search for Reagan and jokes and sit back and enjoy a lot of good clean humor from the last American president who could genuinely make fun of himself and simultaneously entertain an entire room of people on the left and the right.
The one he used to tell about Gorbachev's driver was a real hoot ;-)
You cannot possibly be that ignorant/dishonest.
First: Hillary committed a number of felonies that are well documented - even James Comey listed them as he let her off the hook and in that very press conference where he said no reasonable prosecutor would prosecute her, he said he WOULD prosecute anybody else who did the same things. The laws she broke include but are not limited to: 18USC793, 18USC1519, 18USC1924, 18USC2071
Second: You accuse Trump of committing "high treason" but do not seem to know what you're saying. There's no such thing as "high treason" in US law, there's only treason - and it's punishable by DEATH. So, you are accusing Trump of a death penalty offense and you have no actual evidence that he did ANYTHING wrong. The justice department, the CIA, and the FBI tried to frame the guy. They planted spies in his campaign and wiretapped his campaign. They bought and used Russian spy info against him. The entire Democrat party went nuts against him and half of the Republican party did too. All his enemies have leaked every little thing they could to the press who breathlessly published all of it in the worst light possible, and yet there is still NO EVIDENCE of any Trump-Russia "collusion". Even Meuller's team is packed with Democrat activist lawyers who gave money to the Obama and/or Clinton campaigns and some even worked for Obama and/or Clinton - yet these extreme partisans have NOTHING. Oh, and "collusion" is not even a crime in the USA, so even if your fevered imaginations about Trump were true, it would be a nothingburger - Teddy Kennedy (the Democrat "Lion of the Senate") wrote a letter to the Soviets in 1984 asking them to intervene in the US election and help him defeat Reagan. Teddy was never prosecuted or jailed.
Third: The Obama administration has admitted that Obama himself personally ordered the US Govt agencies responsible to stop trying to interfere with the Russian interference in the 2016 election.... so by YOUR own reasoning Obama himself would actually be guilty of a death penalty for treason.
Do you even believe in the idea of "innocent until proven guilty"?
You should seek the assistance of a mental health professional, sooner rather than later. Your fantasy reality is going to be completely shattered before or during the 2020 election cycle.
is Google .. err... "Alphabet" man Sergei Brin participating in this anti-Trump hate fest, given that much of the Democrat anti-Trump shtick is based on the lie that Trump colluded with Russia and "the Russians are coming! the Russians are coming!" ...... and Sergei is Moscow-born!
Yup.
Hillary laundered money through the Perkins Coie law firm as "legal fees" to opposition research firm Fusion GPS (a violation of federal campaign laws) who hired British spy Christopher Steele to write an anti-Trump "dossier" (foreign "collusion", right?). Steele in-turn hired and used Russian spies to put together this campaign propaganda (which he has testified under oath in a British court is not worth the paper it's written on), and the "dossier" was then fed back into the US Government by Obama administration hacks who used it to get secret warrants to spy on the Trump campaign. Meanwhile, Google leadership and a bunch of their employees were in the Obama White House nearly every week of the 8 Obama years - and remember: Brin is a Russian.
But we're all supposed to worry that Trump is somehow involved with Russia and we're not supposed to worry at all about the Hillary and Obama supporting government employees who used the Russian spy stuff against Trump or the Russian guy at the top of Google...
[sigh]
1950s McCarthyism was just as whacko in mis-assigning guilt. Hollywood execs were all so worried the public might learn that some of their talent were communists, and that might hurt ticket sales, so they created a "blacklist" and stopped providing work to anybody on that blacklist. The blacklist was NOT a government list, and as bad as McCarthy was he was just a DC politician -he did not write the blacklist. The whole thing broke down after a very principled and brave actor named Kirk Douglas refused to obey the blacklist and used some of the banned talent on his films.... but now everybody pretends that McCarthy, who did plenty bad, created the blacklist (it's far easier to pretend than it is to face the ugly truth that Hollywood people fell all over each other to preserve their own money over protecting the rights of others).
You still seem to not know the meaning of the word "ironic".
Google postures and presents itself as a purely neutral force on the internet - a place where anybody can go to seek unbiased search results.
Breitbart is an openly-partisan political site that positions itself on the right, in opposition to left wing sites like Daily Kos. Breitbart does NOT offer itself to the public as a neutral force where anybody can go to get unbiased search results for the entire internet.
My "uneducated political hack" detector's indicator needle just pegged.
It does beg the question, should politics be discussed in the workplace?
Definitely yes. Whilst an employer is not obliged to promote "free speech" in their workspace, their suppressing it would be a bad sign and should make anyone (left wing, liberal or right wing) reconsider doing business with them,.
This is not, for example, the same as allowing insulting speech, bullying or calculated disruption. That is not the same as free speech.
I'll see your Constitution and raise you a Queen.
You know Colbert voted for this guy... if Hillary had won we would be bored off his ass and constantly biting his tongue... "no, can't say that, it would be sexist" Just like calling Bush a chimp was ok, but not Michelle.
You don't understand how elections work, do you?
Of course a private company can express whatever view they like. The real danger here is the echo chamber effect at play. Most of tech is heavily biased towards the left/authoritarian side of the field lately which is a shame. The early days had places such as alt.sex.hamster.and.duct.tape with a voracious defense of freedom of speech. Now I see hate speech clauses showing up in all sorts of places. In the end, if you only allow admittance of similar views and like thought you will create a mono culture. Mono cultures tend to fail.
Google is forgetting that nearly half of our nation voted for the president. I wonder how many contracts for google's cloud services will be renewed by the federal government? This sort of obvious bias will likely have a measurable effect on the bottom line. Maybe they'll learn from this or fail and someone else will learn from the mistake. Likely not though, I suspect more collusion to ban "bad" actors such as Alex Jones.
They don't particularly care about Democrat vs Republican. What shocks people on that level is the possibility that the ties their lawyers and lobbyists have with Washington would be endangered by election of an outsider candidate.
Fortunately for them, Trump's flailing around is not affecting these relationships as much as they feared. It's as though an approaching hurricane had turned back out to sea.
I remember when everyone on Slashdot understood that "liberal" and "libertarian" were both kinds of "progressive".
If you don't like reductive approaches to political labelling, why would you try to bucket "liberal" and "libertarian" as "progressive"? Liberalism is a broad set of political concepts, and encompasses, for example, laissez faire economics, which would not reasonably be described as progressive. Libertarianism has some aspects that progressives like (bodily autonomy) but is often strongly anti-state intervention, and that is not something that would reasonably be described as progressive. I am using all these terms in their dispassionate descriptor sense, not a moral sense, ie I am not expressing a view about whether liberalism, libertarianism or progressive politics are good things.
So I agree with you on the importance of nuance, and I think you could go a lot further to be nuanced.
It did not advocate for protecting or preserving traditional values or traditional institutions.
It advocated for several traditional standpoints: that men are better at thinking than women, that positive discrimination is illegitimate, etc. What's wrong with accepting that these are conservative views?
but it do
Because comedy writers, who are 95%+ liberal, won't criticize Democratic presidents.
We spent 8 years under Obama, and comedians wouldn't touch him. (Despite his ineptitude and corruption.)
If you watch a few of his campaign videos and look at the size of the crowds he got, they were from 6,000 to 10,000 people, filling huge stadiums. Then look at the crowds that Hillary drew, rarely above 2,000 - and all clearly shown on video, and add in the fact that Bernie and Hillary supporters were blocking highways to prevent Trump supporters from even reaching the venues he was speaking at - this clearly shows that Trump had far, far higher support than Hillary, in spite of the endless lies that the media told you...
So NOW you're concerned about companies using their political influence? Where were you when conservative companies like Koch Industries were literally threatening to fire employees if they didn't vote Republican (which is somehow legal now due to the Citizens United). Google's reaction is fairly mild by comparison. It's entirely appropriate for a company to be concerned about how a new administration will affect their business and discuss it with their employees.
Support Right To Repair Legislation.
Damore's paper insinuated no such thing. It recognized that there are differences in how the sexes think, and cited papers saying women were more emotional on average. These are not things anyone who has read any scientific literature would dispute. Its isn't just correlative studies either. We understand the mechanisms well.
refactor the law, its bloated, confusing and unmaintainable.
Sherman Act
Sure.Talking about politics in the workplace will stop about the same time business stops demanding it be the center of all political discourse.
I'm not tense. I'm just terribly, terribly, alert.
No, it's a term that describes a thing. Pretty fucking simple.
It's strange that you seem to be an intelligent, logical person, and yet can't even approach comprehending what James Damore wrote.
It's almost like you didn't read it, and let Gizmodo dictate your opinion (after they published the memo heavily edited and stripped of references).
It's simple.
They aren't Liberals. They are leftists, which is an entirely different and far more evil thing. They would destroy anyone and everything to promote their opinions.
Liberals and conservatives can disagree, sometimes forcefully, but they don't silence each other. They respect the freedom of human expression, and never condone violence.
Leftists, like at Google, Berkeley, CNN, etc, see violence and censorship as a means to suppress opposing views so that their own demonstrably wrong opinions are the only thing left in the room.
Before the actual election, my sig read:
The Pantsuit Enabler vs. the Creamsicle Charlatan. This should be on WWE, not our ballots.
Neither were clean enough for boxing, had to be WWE.
Donald Trump, on a crusade to make Nixon look respectable
Which is weird, because I did. It's almost like you think you have some kind of privileged insight into Damore's arguments because you agree with them. You don't.
To shit post that long of a message as AC requires an actual account so unless APK got one it isn't him. However Alexander Peter Kowalski fully supports all that garbage and quotes parts of it often enough so does it even matter?
...I did not vote for Trump, and I have voted straight Democratic tickets at times, when we needed the checks and balances of divided government.
Corrections:
1. "is own agenda" should be "his own agenda".
2. "representatives of all the of the right" should be "representatives of all of the right".
I'd like to also point out GOP in general is in favor of illegal immigration because businesses want cheaper labor, and business donates campaign funds to the GOP in order to keep it flowing. GOP gives the issue lip service in front of its non-business base, but otherwise has demurred when it had a chance to change it multiple times. Reducing illegals correctly* would probably also require inspecting business payrolls, which businesses don't want. Most businesses want an "easy supply" of workers and lobby with deep pockets to get such.
You sound like a one-issue voter such that illegal immigration trumps Trump's many other downsides in your mind, including his rudeness to our long-time allies.
* A wall is not enough even if it worked (or was more cost effective than spending the money instead on more border guards, which Democrats have usually been in favor of.)
Table-ized A.I.
No, it's a term used to describe the extreme left. It's that simple. Don't hurt yourself thinking about it.
APK isn't an incel, he gets ass fucked 6 times an hour every night down at the glory hole in the Pilot Travel Center off of I81.
google is a public company subject to public ethics which call for fair balanced views - they should all be fired
nothing to see here - move along
You should probably read your link before you post it. Political activity is only protected outside of work hours, and there is no protection for creating a hostile work environment.
Willie Nelson had numerous "conservative" fans denouncing him for hosting a Beto O'Rourke rally.
Show me a video of them doing the same for when Bush won and you’ll have your point. Their reaction is natural for when the nation elects an asshole for president. Let’s not pretend this is normal. We are not required to grit our teeth and bear it when someone like Trump is handed the reigns to power. Trump is not Bush, not Reagan or even Nixon. Liberals are disappointed by those victories. Just as conservatives were when Obama, Clinton or Carter won. The difference here is we were horrified —and if you were being honest, a great deal of real Republicans were as well. It is just that many forgot that on their way to getting everything they wanted from President No Ideas. Even if that meant making nice with Russia, embracing dictators and flipping on nearly every “family value”they ever claimed to hold dear to.
Odd then that they self identify as SJWs then.
Every employee KNOWS the political leanings of their boss. We don't need you to show up at a group meeting and rattle on about it. We already know if we disagree with you in public over your beliefs, you will win. You control the money.
Nobody needs anything other than company issues brought up at company meetings. Commenting on the presidential election was poor form by Google management, who like many upper executives begin believing their word is God's word.
So stop it. I don't care if you like Bernie, or Trump, or Hilary , or libertarians, or the new Whig party. It's irrelevant to our workplace and I already know your views anyway,
Maybe so.
I ride a bicycle to work. The only statement I'm making is that It's an easy way to get exercise. If you want to assume I'm making a statement about AGW you'd be wrong. That's what happens when you make assumptions about what someone's actions mean.
Hi,
I would like permission to use this extract in my latest book, "Crackpots and Weirdos: A complete rendering of absurd thought".
Payment will be in Bilderburg Illuminati coins, I will contact you later with a point of exchange...
You said: "men are better at thinking than women"
The memo did not say this, explicitly or implied, in any way, shape, or form, in any context, or with any interpretation that isn't purposefully deceitful.
It's not that I agree or disagree with his memo. It's that you are demonstrably a liar misrepresenting it in bad faith, which makes even discussing the topic untenable.
You are a massive piece of shit, at best.
Farmers right conservatives are the only group allowed a bias. Everyone should suck it up and comply.
It's not just Breitbart though. Fox News, the entire circle-jerk of right-wing Talk Radio, the Murdoch media empire, Sinclair Media, the list is substantial. These range from modestly right wing to Right Wing Pravda.
And yet we are subjected to endless whining about "The Mainstream Media", and how unfair they are, with their "facts" and their "logic" and their "questions". Doesn't the MSM understand that the role of media is to slavishly support the Great Leader? That's how they do it in every friendly neighborhood dictatorship! And if it's good enough for Kim Jong Un, it's good enough for me, the Common Man!!
I'm hard-pressed to think of one straight-ahead, non-biased, professional scoop from any right wing media source. There's no journalism there, just pre-determined talking points and jingoistic tag lines. "Hillary Bad, Trump Goooood! Obama Bad, Bush Goooood! Baaaaaaa!"
I hate typos.
s/ensured/ensued/
Freedom = (Meaningful - Coerced) Choice != (Speech | Beer^2), and sad sock puppets' bad mods avail them naught.
I hate typos some more.
s/dismay at/dismay of/
That's near the bottom, but I can even explain what happened. I changed "the google" as a corporate reference that called for "at" to the personal reference "googlers", which now calls for the preposition "of".
Freedom = (Meaningful - Coerced) Choice != (Speech | Beer^2), and sad sock puppets' bad mods avail them naught.
Am I confused? Is this the same story getting recycled, some kind of dup, or was there some kind of "event" that resulted in the deletion of a bunch of comments? I can see where it might have triggered a troll attack of some kind, so perhaps it was cleaned up and reposted?
Freedom = (Meaningful - Coerced) Choice != (Speech | Beer^2), and sad sock puppets' bad mods avail them naught.
The link says in the very first line that you can't be fired simply due to having differing political views from your employer. In other words, if you wouldn't fire a liberal for it, you can't fire a conservative for it either. Which goes against the comment I was replying to. Incidentally, nowhere in the post is it said that political activity is only protected outside of work hours, just that political activity can't directly interfere with business. Since James Damore's memo was in direct response to a request for feedback concerning a topic that's already political, a memo that wasn't even meant to be spread outside of a forum that was explicitly intended to be a safe space for discussion, it would be pretty hard to argue that in his case.
Rob
No, it's a term to allow you to disregard a stance with zero thought because "they're at it again"
Some people want everyone to be happy, even if it means the happiest must be slightly less happy but still happy, while some only care about their own happiness, and believe anything that makes them even slightly less happy is a theft from them, personally. People who use the phrase "sjw" tend to fall into the latter category.
Happiness isn't limited. Rights aren't limited. There isn't some stockpile on freedom that runs out if you give minorities equal treatment, but you people always act like equal is just completely unreasonable, like someone is stealing from you because someone else is now equal.
Oh come off it. It argued that men are rational where women are emotional, and that is why men do better in the workplace.
Stop pussyfooting around and being cowardly, and own your fucking viewpoint. You people are such pathetic cowards.
You fuckwits are seriously sharing genuine crap from Breitbart now??????
Slashdot, go fuck youselves.
Breitbart clearly has their panties in a knot (something that seems to happen a lot with them). However before I get excited, ask yourself this. Do you think that Google is going to walk away from right wing money?
I for one do not. So while their C-level executives may very well have political leanings, and they've been rather free with sharing those leanings, I still think that's a personal matter. C-level executives in general know very well where their bread is buttered. It's an extremely rare executive suite that is going to let those personal preferences get in the way of customer acquisition, business transactions, corporate growth and all that.
There's a reason for the phrase, "It's not personal, it's just business."
Do you have the slightest idea how SCOTUS works?
You are incorrect. The defining characteristic of a SJW is not that they want everyone to be happy (how quaint), it is that they want to limit the freedom of other people in the futile attempt to prevent offense. Think politically correct speech codes, racially segregated safe spaces, costume bans, etc...
It has long been held that things fell downwards, but it isn't conservative to expect things to fall when you release them. He was citing modern research as well, if not completely accepted research.
refactor the law, its bloated, confusing and unmaintainable.
For over 20 years, everyone at Google has been able to freely express their opinions at these meetings.
Is that like how everyone at Google is able to freely express their opinions privately about diversity?
Southpark sucked that season. They never used to keep continuous stories in their show and they messed up badly with that one. They went for the low hanging fruit and it hurt them.
To be fair, every single time a republican wins the opposition always expresses a concern about the individual who won rather than the party. Apparently there is no such a thing as a sane conservative in liberal eyes. The whole holier than thou attitude stinks.
People have to accept the fact that elections won't always go their way and it does not give them the right to level personal attacks at the President. The winner's personal opinions are none of your business. The only thing that matters is how well (or not) he/she does their job. People who believe as if the President must be a saint are idiots. It's just a job, like anything else.
One of us sure doesn't!