Of course censorship isn't the answer. Anyone should be allowed to hold a peaceful rally on equal and non-discriminatory terms.
Social censureship may be part of an answer though. Governments and societies are not required to be ideologically neutral. No private individual or private organisation is required to play along.
If you don't like this, start your own nazi chat service or be a good national socialist and nationalise the chat industry.
Science is not only "by the high-priests for the high-priests" of a formal scholar education. Everyone is free to formulate his or her thoughts in a coherent fashion and present his or her data and interpretation to whomever is willing to read it. If you disagree, you're free to present different data and/or a different interpretation.
...and that is why people think vaccines cause autism, GMOs are poison, climate change is a hoax, and the Earth is 6000 years old.
Science is a process. All that ivory tower stuff is there to prevent personal biases getting in the way of the evidence. It's an imperfect system but all the evidence shows that the alternatives are universally less reliable.
Reality doesn't care about public opinion. If you want to progress science, your argument has to stand up to the scrutiny of experts.
And checking that it's not too similar to the most recent password is straightforward, since most "change password" interfaces ask for the most recent password at the same time.
Oh and the helmet isn't that heavy because it protects the head better, it's because it's an over-engineered augmented reality headset which hasn't been miniaturised.
I don't know the answer to your question, but by concentrating on the USAF you have ignored the two other US military branches and ten other countries that the JOINT Strike Fighter is supposed to be designed for.
Do you work for Lockheed Martin? You seem qualified.
I'm sure you have an actual example of a Google employee saying "men are all patriarchal rapist nazi baby killer[s]" in an internal memo and not being hauled in front of HR or fired.
Even if neuroticism affects women more than men, that doesn't mean that it's accurate to say that women are neurotic. Breast cancer affects more women than men, too. That doesn't mean that it's accurate to say "women are breast-cancerous".
OK, that's not a word, but you know what I mean. Look up the baseline fallacy some time.
How does one being a woman or an alien or Chinese help the computer science? Being meritorious and creative does. It's this simple.
How many products have you seen that purport to solve your problems, but are uselessfor some large segments of the population?
We all know of products that don't work if you're left-handed, or have a strong Scottish accent, or some other thing created by a homogenous group of designers making unconscious assumptions.
Hell, the F-35 helmet is designed to disproportionately kill women when ejecting. Nobody thought that was a good idea. Just... nobody thought.
If they had shown the evidence that women aren't neurotic (hint: they aren't), then the whole thing would have calmed down.
No it would not. He might have calmed down, but in the mean time, every woman and every latent altcuck working at Google would have received the same message, loud and clear, that workplace hostility is acceptable conduct no matter what the Code of Conduct says.
If it was just his opinions, that would be one thing. There are ways to express controversial opinions without pissing off most of your colleagues.
By any chance, are you meaning that the guy's ideas are less founded than the VP of XYZ and Sundar's Ideas, without listening to them in completion?
I'm sure that Sundar read the memo and skimmed some of the ensuing discussion (including this guy's responses) on the internal G+ instance. And as the CEO of one of the biggest organisations in the tech industry, I'm sure that Sundar has it all before, expressed in less inept ways. I don't work anywhere near there, and I've heard it all before.
But all this is completely beside point. For the several hundredth time, this guy was not fired for his ideas. He was fired for his conduct.
Everyone inside Google knows where the Code of Conduct is and what it contains. He pointed to the relevant sections. This is more than enough.
This proved that they want "diversity of skin colour/sex/etc" not diversity of thought.
One of these is a legal requirement and one of these is not.
But that's completely beside the point. Anyone who thinks that this guy was fired for his opinions and not his conduct has not been paying attention. That includes the guy himself.
By kicking Damore out of G, they have bolstered his hypothesis that other ideas are absolutely not welcome.
I'm certain that we haven't heard the last of this dude's persecution complex.
Sundar Pichai should have clarified on what points is the author wrong, and how. Given that the author's post had got out of company and is circulating in WWW, people of the world should know and get clear on what G's ideologies are, rather than just writing "He violated the code of conduct".
This makes no sense to me.
First off, Sundar Pichai was on holiday. Nobody should be expected to write a press release while on holiday. And nor did he; he wrote an internal memo which leaked. The "people of the world" as a whole were clearly not the intended audience, merely that subset who are already supposed to be aware of what the Code of Conduct says.
But when it comes to rewards and jobs, there should be only meritocracy.
Of course. Many younger programmers don't really understand what constitutes "merit" in this field, though. Engineering is the craft of solving human problems through the intelligent and appropriate application of science and technology. If you can't deal with the "human" part, this isn't the business for you.
Slashdot Mirror
Of course censorship isn't the answer. Anyone should be allowed to hold a peaceful rally on equal and non-discriminatory terms.
Social censureship may be part of an answer though. Governments and societies are not required to be ideologically neutral. No private individual or private organisation is required to play along.
If you don't like this, start your own nazi chat service or be a good national socialist and nationalise the chat industry.
UN-altered REPRODUCTION and DISSEMINATION of this IMPORTANT Information is ENCOURAGED, ESPECIALLY to COMPUTER BULLETIN BOARDS.
Turn on, tune in, sell out.
The rule of thumb is that if a film has a lot of people who have been contracted to get a share of the profits, the movie never makes a profit.
Domestic box office takings for Return of the Jedi was 10x production costs. It is yet to make a profit on paper.
Nah you get more plutonium from chemtrails.
Who the fsck modded this insightful?
Probably a scientist.
Science is not only "by the high-priests for the high-priests" of a formal scholar education. Everyone is free to formulate his or her thoughts in a coherent fashion and present his or her data and interpretation to whomever is willing to read it. If you disagree, you're free to present different data and/or a different interpretation.
...and that is why people think vaccines cause autism, GMOs are poison, climate change is a hoax, and the Earth is 6000 years old.
Science is a process. All that ivory tower stuff is there to prevent personal biases getting in the way of the evidence. It's an imperfect system but all the evidence shows that the alternatives are universally less reliable.
Reality doesn't care about public opinion. If you want to progress science, your argument has to stand up to the scrutiny of experts.
They probably haven't made a profit though, thanks to Hollywood Accounting.
Two really good ones if you include the director's cut of Aliens.
And checking that it's not too similar to the most recent password is straightforward, since most "change password" interfaces ask for the most recent password at the same time.
Oh and the helmet isn't that heavy because it protects the head better, it's because it's an over-engineered augmented reality headset which hasn't been miniaturised.
There are some air forces where women comprise 8% of pilots (Israel IIRC) and the helmet famously increases the risk of death by a factor of 4.
I don't know the answer to your question, but by concentrating on the USAF you have ignored the two other US military branches and ten other countries that the JOINT Strike Fighter is supposed to be designed for.
Do you work for Lockheed Martin? You seem qualified.
I'm sure you have an actual example of a Google employee saying "men are all patriarchal rapist nazi baby killer[s]" in an internal memo and not being hauled in front of HR or fired.
Even if neuroticism affects women more than men, that doesn't mean that it's accurate to say that women are neurotic. Breast cancer affects more women than men, too. That doesn't mean that it's accurate to say "women are breast-cancerous".
OK, that's not a word, but you know what I mean. Look up the baseline fallacy some time.
How does one being a woman or an alien or Chinese help the computer science? Being meritorious and creative does. It's this simple.
How many products have you seen that purport to solve your problems, but are uselessfor some large segments of the population?
We all know of products that don't work if you're left-handed, or have a strong Scottish accent, or some other thing created by a homogenous group of designers making unconscious assumptions.
Hell, the F-35 helmet is designed to disproportionately kill women when ejecting. Nobody thought that was a good idea. Just... nobody thought.
If they had shown the evidence that women aren't neurotic (hint: they aren't), then the whole thing would have calmed down.
No it would not. He might have calmed down, but in the mean time, every woman and every latent altcuck working at Google would have received the same message, loud and clear, that workplace hostility is acceptable conduct no matter what the Code of Conduct says.
If it was just his opinions, that would be one thing. There are ways to express controversial opinions without pissing off most of your colleagues.
By any chance, are you meaning that the guy's ideas are less founded than the VP of XYZ and Sundar's Ideas, without listening to them in completion?
I'm sure that Sundar read the memo and skimmed some of the ensuing discussion (including this guy's responses) on the internal G+ instance. And as the CEO of one of the biggest organisations in the tech industry, I'm sure that Sundar has it all before, expressed in less inept ways. I don't work anywhere near there, and I've heard it all before.
But all this is completely beside point. For the several hundredth time, this guy was not fired for his ideas. He was fired for his conduct.
Everyone inside Google knows where the Code of Conduct is and what it contains. He pointed to the relevant sections. This is more than enough.
Dumping humans who spend their time causing problems rather than solving them is one way to fix things. We've all had colleagues like that.
This proved that they want "diversity of skin colour/sex/etc" not diversity of thought.
One of these is a legal requirement and one of these is not.
But that's completely beside the point. Anyone who thinks that this guy was fired for his opinions and not his conduct has not been paying attention. That includes the guy himself.
Better example: Biologist calls on his employer to take young-Earth creationism seriously.
Everything proves a conspiracy theory. Even the lack of evidence is proof of a cover-up.
By kicking Damore out of G, they have bolstered his hypothesis that other ideas are absolutely not welcome.
I'm certain that we haven't heard the last of this dude's persecution complex.
Sundar Pichai should have clarified on what points is the author wrong, and how. Given that the author's post had got out of company and is circulating in WWW, people of the world should know and get clear on what G's ideologies are, rather than just writing "He violated the code of conduct".
This makes no sense to me.
First off, Sundar Pichai was on holiday. Nobody should be expected to write a press release while on holiday. And nor did he; he wrote an internal memo which leaked. The "people of the world" as a whole were clearly not the intended audience, merely that subset who are already supposed to be aware of what the Code of Conduct says.
But when it comes to rewards and jobs, there should be only meritocracy.
Of course. Many younger programmers don't really understand what constitutes "merit" in this field, though. Engineering is the craft of solving human problems through the intelligent and appropriate application of science and technology. If you can't deal with the "human" part, this isn't the business for you.
In case you didn't know, a lot of Android tablets are x86.
They should call it The Cousins.
The phrase "reality show" is understood to mean televised nonscripted surreality. Not actual reality.