Maybe you should work on making what you write more comprehensible before accusing others of reading comprehension problems:) I can see now why I could be a thing for you. Besides, me having a different opinion of the rant the guy wrote about his own company at work (and then people are astonished that he was fired!) is not an indication that I didn't read it. Also, what's with being too much of a coward to spell a racist insult correctly and trying to hide it?
Their economy is in the tank because they have an economic monoculture and the oil price has tanked - a mistake all *isms can make, it's just bad management. See also things like Detroit depending on a single industry for examples. Other problems though are a direct result of how the place is run.
Maybe you should get out more since you seem to be losing your grip and are getting different posters at different sites mixed up. "Failed at reading comprehension" - what a fucking ridiculous cowardly weasel insult that should have been drowned at birth. If you can't discuss an issue without lowering yourself into that shit why bother? Of course we can all read here, and many here are probably old enough to have taught you how to read in the first place.
He brought the business he worked for into disrepute. Whether you or I agree that he should have been fired (I don't think he should have been but it's obvious why he was fired) doesn't change that the CEO has a reason to do it.
It's kind of funny seeing all these right wingers argue that Google should act like an anarchists collective instead of being the risk-averse conservative corporation that it really is under all the hype. If you don't fit in they throw you out just like any other large corporation.
all sorts of loaded words that don't comport with neither the style nor the substance of the actual document
Loaded? Remember the title of the thing!
So no, you didn't read it. If you think you did, then you've failed at reading comprehension.
Ah, the insult of the day in grade schools again. Of course I can fucking read. Where are you that you are surrounded by illiterate people that you seem to want to always pick on?
The heavy left-wing political slant most Hollywood stars and writers want to impart on films isn't helping sales either
Annoying yes (especially in "Ghost in the Shell" and "Suicide Squad" where it was stuck on very awkwardly in a way that didn't fit the plots) but it's how the slant is applied. For example, every single "Godzilla" movie has the slant, it's part of the genre, but it doesn't have to be so annoying.
Yes, he was being a bit of a weasel about it instead of having the courage to express what he was clearly implying outright. Maybe you should read it again - it's only ten pages.
Interesting. So he wanted to start a fight, did it deliberately with plenty of premeditation and now he's pretending to be all innocent. What a scumbag. He's got his five minutes of fame though.
No.
The ones he cited don't actually support what is really a political rant so they don't come into it. If he had written it differently or chosen different things to cite maybe they would. Also WTF does his citation of something about autism have to do with his manifesto - the citations are just props.
Even if, mis-informed or ill-worded, he certainly didn't deserve to be treated the way he was
The title alone was picking a fight with management. Whether the contents were correct or not wasn't going to get him saved from being fired since he was working for a large American Corporation.
Australia is putting in service the human-piloted Joint Strike Fighter.
Only when it doesn't rain and only with pilots with very thick necks. The problem about pilots needing oxygen all of the time they are flying (some customers are just so demanding!) is still being looked into.
Of course he is "completely unqualified", but he employees people who can do those things. This ranting guy previously at Google was trying to do what he did unsupported and so he came tor grief. His citations don't support his politics.
Cool - so he's an engineer now too! When I did engineering decades back we had at least one subject on management that this guy clearly never attempted since it warned us not to write shit like his "women taking our jobs" screed.
Apparently he has a Ph.D. in biology, so he's probably got more background than most people here
Actually no - substantially less RELEVANT BACKGROUND than many people here (probably even the majority) as you should have noticed on reading the thing. He's gone way off the reservation and biology can only be seen as a spot on he horizon - he's way out of his depth, so far out that even an MBA looks good in comparison. The darkly amusing thing is his effort to shout from the rooftops that women are less suitable employees for Google has indicated that he personally was then seen as the least suitable person at Google. It's kind of sad that he didn't see the obvious consequence coming.
It might be better to say that Google expressed a staggering amount of bad judgment.
If they were an anarchist collective maybe, but they are a corporation and it seems it's only people here that are astonished when a corporation acts like one. Insult the boss and you are out the door.
I've seen this written more than a dozen times now and it's just strange. Of course everyone's read the thing, it's only about ten pages. Was it so hard to read ten pages? Do you want a gold star sticker? The thing pretty well tapdanced through a social minefield jumping on every mine. Even conservative Christians were held up for ridicule just for the sake of an analogy. He also got things backwards since he was trying to show (by misdirection) that women are less suitable for high stress environments but what's so stressful about coding at Google. Who dies when you fuckup? Better get all those women out of nursing and safe and snug at Google if this guys bro-screed is fact and not a whining fantasy.
Am waiting for you to actually post a scientific rebuttal
There's no more science in his screed than in a snakeoil medicine show. One of his citations goes to something about autism - they are distractions that do not support his conclusions. Read what he's cited and then make your demands about a "scientific rebuttal" if you like, but I don't think you'll need to, you'll have your own.
He still hasn't learned - it was his whining about "heresy at Google" that got the CEO's attention and showed to him that Google is a large American Corporation and not some sort of anarchists collective. I doubt if much was read beyond the title of his screed before he was fired.
It shouldn't be - a room full of people with the same idea is kind of limited while a bunch of people who come in with different experience is not. That's why you don't hire an entire graduating class but instead a few people that have had some experience elsewhere or even just graduated elsewhere. Monocultures suck. You want an employee base similar in diversity to your customer base or you are going to make what some customers will see as newbie mistakes. The obvious is picking product names that are insults in a language that a major percentage of your customers speak but there are many others (eg. a product that most women seek as too ugly to buy but with no women seeing the design before the decision is made to go ahead you'd never know).
The really obvious one though is if you limit the pool you employ from you are trending towards mediocre and missing the chance to get good employees from another pool. All the above should be incredibly obvious but I suppose "alt-right" or whatever agendas get in the way.
Or, even if you're not a "dick who says cunty things", but just somebody presenting facts, backed up by statistics, that hurt somebody's feelings.
Then maybe he should have done that then instead of attacking his management and then going on with a lot of shit that has opposite implications to his conclusions.
So he thinks women perform badly under stress - OK then, get them out of nursing where lives are in the balance and into a nice cushy office job coding at google where nobody dies when they fuckup. That's how backwards his little trip into "science" is - it's a fucking snakeoil medicine show.
If this is the way you are responding then you obviously didn't read what he wrote
This again? People keep writing that over and over. WTF is it with that? It's only ten pages - do you guys want a fucking gold star sticker for reading it?
Try a different insult, of course everyone has read that "girl germs" screed by the guy that proved by writing it that he was a worse fit for google than any other male or female in the place, no matter what his out there appeal to biology said.
Every work place may have an agenda. Google on the other hand is pushing a anti-speech, pro-censorship agenda which you don't seem to have a problem with.
I've never said I have a problem with it - all I'm saying is that given what Google is they are acting exactly as expected. They don't have to have political signs all over their lawn from people they hate just like you don't have to.
Slashdot Mirror
Maybe you should work on making what you write more comprehensible before accusing others of reading comprehension problems :) I can see now why I could be a thing for you.
Besides, me having a different opinion of the rant the guy wrote about his own company at work (and then people are astonished that he was fired!) is not an indication that I didn't read it.
Also, what's with being too much of a coward to spell a racist insult correctly and trying to hide it?
Their economy is in the tank because they have an economic monoculture and the oil price has tanked - a mistake all *isms can make, it's just bad management. See also things like Detroit depending on a single industry for examples.
Other problems though are a direct result of how the place is run.
Maybe you should get out more since you seem to be losing your grip and are getting different posters at different sites mixed up.
"Failed at reading comprehension" - what a fucking ridiculous cowardly weasel insult that should have been drowned at birth. If you can't discuss an issue without lowering yourself into that shit why bother? Of course we can all read here, and many here are probably old enough to have taught you how to read in the first place.
He brought the business he worked for into disrepute. Whether you or I agree that he should have been fired (I don't think he should have been but it's obvious why he was fired) doesn't change that the CEO has a reason to do it.
It's kind of funny seeing all these right wingers argue that Google should act like an anarchists collective instead of being the risk-averse conservative corporation that it really is under all the hype. If you don't fit in they throw you out just like any other large corporation.
Loaded? Remember the title of the thing!
Ah, the insult of the day in grade schools again. Of course I can fucking read. Where are you that you are surrounded by illiterate people that you seem to want to always pick on?
Annoying yes (especially in "Ghost in the Shell" and "Suicide Squad" where it was stuck on very awkwardly in a way that didn't fit the plots) but it's how the slant is applied. For example, every single "Godzilla" movie has the slant, it's part of the genre, but it doesn't have to be so annoying.
Yes, he was being a bit of a weasel about it instead of having the courage to express what he was clearly implying outright.
Maybe you should read it again - it's only ten pages.
Seriously? You don't think multinational corporations are conservative enough? Do you want to being back the King or something?
Interesting. So he wanted to start a fight, did it deliberately with plenty of premeditation and now he's pretending to be all innocent. What a scumbag. He's got his five minutes of fame though.
No.
The ones he cited don't actually support what is really a political rant so they don't come into it. If he had written it differently or chosen different things to cite maybe they would. Also WTF does his citation of something about autism have to do with his manifesto - the citations are just props.
He "leaked it" to more than ten thousand people didn't he?
The title alone was picking a fight with management. Whether the contents were correct or not wasn't going to get him saved from being fired since he was working for a large American Corporation.
Only when it doesn't rain and only with pilots with very thick necks. The problem about pilots needing oxygen all of the time they are flying (some customers are just so demanding!) is still being looked into.
Of course he is "completely unqualified", but he employees people who can do those things.
This ranting guy previously at Google was trying to do what he did unsupported and so he came tor grief. His citations don't support his politics.
Cool - so he's an engineer now too!
When I did engineering decades back we had at least one subject on management that this guy clearly never attempted since it warned us not to write shit like his "women taking our jobs" screed.
The bar seems to be getting lower and lower.
Since when is a recent graduate an expert?
Actually no - substantially less RELEVANT BACKGROUND than many people here (probably even the majority) as you should have noticed on reading the thing. He's gone way off the reservation and biology can only be seen as a spot on he horizon - he's way out of his depth, so far out that even an MBA looks good in comparison.
The darkly amusing thing is his effort to shout from the rooftops that women are less suitable employees for Google has indicated that he personally was then seen as the least suitable person at Google. It's kind of sad that he didn't see the obvious consequence coming.
If they were an anarchist collective maybe, but they are a corporation and it seems it's only people here that are astonished when a corporation acts like one.
Insult the boss and you are out the door.
I've seen this written more than a dozen times now and it's just strange. Of course everyone's read the thing, it's only about ten pages. Was it so hard to read ten pages? Do you want a gold star sticker?
The thing pretty well tapdanced through a social minefield jumping on every mine. Even conservative Christians were held up for ridicule just for the sake of an analogy. He also got things backwards since he was trying to show (by misdirection) that women are less suitable for high stress environments but what's so stressful about coding at Google. Who dies when you fuckup? Better get all those women out of nursing and safe and snug at Google if this guys bro-screed is fact and not a whining fantasy.
There's no more science in his screed than in a snakeoil medicine show. One of his citations goes to something about autism - they are distractions that do not support his conclusions. Read what he's cited and then make your demands about a "scientific rebuttal" if you like, but I don't think you'll need to, you'll have your own.
He still hasn't learned - it was his whining about "heresy at Google" that got the CEO's attention and showed to him that Google is a large American Corporation and not some sort of anarchists collective.
I doubt if much was read beyond the title of his screed before he was fired.
It shouldn't be - a room full of people with the same idea is kind of limited while a bunch of people who come in with different experience is not. That's why you don't hire an entire graduating class but instead a few people that have had some experience elsewhere or even just graduated elsewhere.
Monocultures suck.
You want an employee base similar in diversity to your customer base or you are going to make what some customers will see as newbie mistakes. The obvious is picking product names that are insults in a language that a major percentage of your customers speak but there are many others (eg. a product that most women seek as too ugly to buy but with no women seeing the design before the decision is made to go ahead you'd never know).
The really obvious one though is if you limit the pool you employ from you are trending towards mediocre and missing the chance to get good employees from another pool.
All the above should be incredibly obvious but I suppose "alt-right" or whatever agendas get in the way.
Then try reading it when sober and get back to us.
It's 1930s "genetics for jobs" shit and some undergraduate fumblings at psychology.
Or, even if you're not a "dick who says cunty things", but just somebody presenting facts, backed up by statistics, that hurt somebody's feelings.
Then maybe he should have done that then instead of attacking his management and then going on with a lot of shit that has opposite implications to his conclusions.
So he thinks women perform badly under stress - OK then, get them out of nursing where lives are in the balance and into a nice cushy office job coding at google where nobody dies when they fuckup.
That's how backwards his little trip into "science" is - it's a fucking snakeoil medicine show.
This again? People keep writing that over and over. WTF is it with that? It's only ten pages - do you guys want a fucking gold star sticker for reading it?
Try a different insult, of course everyone has read that "girl germs" screed by the guy that proved by writing it that he was a worse fit for google than any other male or female in the place, no matter what his out there appeal to biology said.
I've never said I have a problem with it - all I'm saying is that given what Google is they are acting exactly as expected. They don't have to have political signs all over their lawn from people they hate just like you don't have to.