Sure if you stopped someone on the street most probably couldn't write down the steps. However, the steps are: Enter the url gab.ai in browser or google it, click where it says download android app. Android will then guide you thru the rest.
I'll add another one then, lying under oath is that something you've heard about? Just admit that you're wrong, not all speech is protected by the first amendment and pretty much everyone can name a few examples, just at the top of their head.
Huawei opened office close by Ericssons hq, and atleast three people was arrested giving IP to a russian, probably one with diplomatic immunity given the secrecy surrounding the issue, don't remember how it all turned out in the end though. (This all happened a couple of years ago).
No Swedish jobs affected (where most r&d is made). They centralize sales and get out of support contracts they are doing at a loss. This is as far as reports go, very little has been said officially except for the no swedish jobs affected.
Your socials are covered by the collective agreement and th swedish government. Those who are able to negotiate private health insurance are key positions not the average worker. If you have to take care of your kid it pays about 80% of your salary and it's no biggie and you are as a male encuraged to take parental leave (for no other reason then to spend time with your kid) under a very generous system.
Actually Ericsson has employees with work permits, however to get one you must have an offer of work with conditions that are not worse than the collective agreement or what's common on the swedish labour market. As Ericsson has a collective agreement they can not (easily at least) dump wages. As others have noted layoffs in Sweden is cheap and engineer salaries are lower than for example germany.
Actually there are. Higher education in Sweden used to be free for all, that led to a lot of students from Pakistan, India, Bangladesh (and others). They generally studied tech related subjects. On a swedish student visa you are allowed to work, so many found work that could be combined with the studies. Once the studies are over you either go back or as most opt, you try to get a work permit. Rules are you need an offer of employment valid for two years that pays at least 13000 sek/month (about 1600 usd). Do that twice and third time you get a permanent residency. What happend was that they couldn't find work related to their education under those conditions (it's the valid for two years part that is problematic and you can only have one employer so no temp work), but they could get an offer of employment from the menial work they did for extra money as a student. Many are now stuck in those positions as their education is slowly fading into obscurity.
In reality they needed to be inclusive saying how they want to hear everyone's opinions and how they take those concepts into account when making policy. Basically, the public responses have just reinforced the complaints that the author had with the programs in the first place. (Especially Sarah Mei, who basically just called him names and insulted his intelligence without any sort of direct rebuttal to his claims.)
I Don't know who Sara Mei is but she does not seem to work at google. This is how google’s new Vice President of Diversity, Integrity & Governance, Danielle Brown reponded internally and the way I read it it seems just like the apropriate response you where looking for.
Googlers
I’m Danielle, Google’s brand new VP of Diversity, Integrity & Governance. I started just a couple of weeks ago, and I had hoped to take another week or so to get the lay of the land before introducing myself to you all. But given the heated debate we’ve seen over the past few days, I feel compelled to say a few words.
Many of you have read an internal document shared by someone in our engineering organization, expressing views on the natural abilities and characteristics of different genders, as well as whether one can speak freely of these things at Google. And like many of you, I found that it advanced incorrect assumptions about gender. I’m not going to link to it here as it’s not a viewpoint that I or this company endorses, promotes or encourages.
Diversity and inclusion are a fundamental part of our values and the culture we continue to cultivate. We are unequivocal in our belief that diversity and inclusion are critical to our success as a company, and we’ll continue to stand for that and be committed to it for the long haul. As Ari Balogh said in his internal G+ post, “Building an open, inclusive environment is core to who we are, and the right thing to do. ‘Nuff said. “
Google has taken a strong stand on this issue, by releasing its demographic data and creating a company wide OKR on diversity and inclusion. Strong stands elicit strong reactions. Changing a culture is hard, and it’s often uncomfortable. But I firmly believe Google is doing the right thing, and that’s why I took this job.
Part of building an open, inclusive environment means fostering a culture in which those with alternative views, including different political views, feel safe sharing their opinions. But that discourse needs to work alongside the principles of equal employment found in our Code of Conduct, policies, and anti-discrimination laws.
I’ve been in the industry for a long time, and I can tell you that I’ve never worked at a company that has so many platforms for employees to express themselves—TGIF, Memegen, internal G+, thousands of discussion groups. I know this conversation doesn’t end with my email today. I look forward to continuing to hear your thoughts as I settle in and meet with Googlers across the company.
When you hire a person you hire a particular individual with more or less unique traits. Going from the general to the particular can easely lead you astray.
Ponder this: The average car has a manual clutch and you need two feet to control it. The average woman has less than two feet.
But the conclution that we need to stop trying to recruit female drivers as on average they just physically can't drive a normal car without special adaptation is hopfully to all obviously and totally ridiculous.
OPs point was that the there is an overhelming effort to suppress other viewpoints. My point is that this is not the case as those exact viewpoints are being published and discussed here and in many other places and as I've pointed out to others, if any viewpoint is missing please feel free to chime in with those views rather than just anonymously posting that they have views that they are somehow not able to state.
Your post is a bit to long to reply to in detail, but I'll say this, your place of work is not a free speach zone. If you employer does not have policies in place to create a good working environment, or does not follow them or make such polices when pointed out to them you are probable better off at another place of work. There simply cannot be made enough legislation to prevent an employer from being an idiot.
I'm not taking a position on whether or not he will be fired, I don't know. My claim is that his views have not been silenced and whatever effort have been done to do so has quite obviously not had any effect. Although I cannot prove it, I might even go out on a limb an say that the danger for him of losing his job has contributed to a disproportionate attention to his views (as support for this I can only refer to the number of times it has been mentioned in the debate).
She gravitates towards dolls, picture books of people, and wants to be held/cuddled a lot. He gravitates towards cars, dump trucks/loaders, blocks, picture books of trucks and construction sites, and only wants to be held if it involves tumbling, tossing, and spinning..
The parent posts (pun unintended) point was that
Little boy play is competitive, little girl play is cooperative and egalitarian.
I'm just curious to know if you interpret their play in similar terms as well (as you seem to agree but it is not obvious from your description).
its not a problem though thats what we are trying to get you to understand. people can choose to do what they want to do
Although an honourable view on life, here is a reality check! You're stating this in a discussion about an article containing the sentence. "It attributes the gender gap in technology to biology-based differences in abilities (such as "speaking up" and "leading") and different personality traits (including "neuroticism")."
I see plenty who agree with him in this thread, and I'm quite certain similar points will be argued publicly again. In fact I'm willing to bet on it, will you bet against?
Hey, he means presented in a loaded way where it can't be discussed relationally but must be automatically rejected by all because of disingenuous associations.
Be honest of yourself, ever hear someone call conservatives "nazi" or "fascists " or anything else to both increase their victimhood, increase the Them/Us mentality and make even entertaining the conversation social suicide.
The terms "nazi" and "fascist" are as of now in this thread at only mentioned by you? As the 2 references to "feminazis" can't very well further your agenda of victimization I'd just add that "sjw" counts 41 in this thread and that we both share a hope that a more meaningful discussion will follow.
Frankly, right now it does seem like - on both sides of the political spectrum - many people's default response to anything they don't like is to attempt shouting it down.
I certainly agree to that. And since no side is showing any sign of succeding in that particular effort, I'd really like an end to posts and articles claiming that you can't debate certain issues, when they are debated right there and then. It makes no sense and does not add to the discussion.
Slashdot Mirror
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
Mein Kampf is banned in many countries.
Fom what I can find, sales are banned in the Neatherlands, would you care to mention the other countries in which sales are banned?
The Wandering Jew by Eugene Sue is the most censored book. It is so censored that even a show about censored books does not mention it.
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
Sure if you stopped someone on the street most probably couldn't write down the steps.
However, the steps are:
Enter the url gab.ai in browser or google it, click where it says download android app. Android will then guide you thru the rest.
If you don't like the guy you vote him out, or what do you intend to do in the next presidential election?
I'll add another one then, lying under oath is that something you've heard about? Just admit that you're wrong, not all speech is protected by the first amendment and pretty much everyone can name a few examples, just at the top of their head.
Inaccurate and untrue speech is still protected by the First Amendment.
No, not in all cases. Yell fire in a crowded theatre or slander someone and you are not protected. Is this really news to you?
You can choose to live by your own rules, but the consequence of Schenck v. United States 1919 still applies. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
the 1st amendment prevents Google et all from discriminating like this.
Willing to take a bet?
Huawei opened office close by Ericssons hq, and atleast three people was arrested giving IP to a russian, probably one with diplomatic immunity given the secrecy surrounding the issue, don't remember how it all turned out in the end though. (This all happened a couple of years ago).
No Swedish jobs affected (where most r&d is made). They centralize sales and get out of support contracts they are doing at a loss. This is as far as reports go, very little has been said officially except for the no swedish jobs affected.
Your socials are covered by the collective agreement and th swedish government. Those who are able to negotiate private health insurance are key positions not the average worker. If you have to take care of your kid it pays about 80% of your salary and it's no biggie and you are as a male encuraged to take parental leave (for no other reason then to spend time with your kid) under a very generous system.
Actually Ericsson has employees with work permits, however to get one you must have an offer of work with conditions that are not worse than the collective agreement or what's common on the swedish labour market. As Ericsson has a collective agreement they can not (easily at least) dump wages. As others have noted layoffs in Sweden is cheap and engineer salaries are lower than for example germany.
For research? No.
Actually there are. Higher education in Sweden used to be free for all, that led to a lot of students from Pakistan, India, Bangladesh (and others). They generally studied tech related subjects. On a swedish student visa you are allowed to work, so many found work that could be combined with the studies. Once the studies are over you either go back or as most opt, you try to get a work permit. Rules are you need an offer of employment valid for two years that pays at least 13000 sek/month (about 1600 usd). Do that twice and third time you get a permanent residency. What happend was that they couldn't find work related to their education under those conditions (it's the valid for two years part that is problematic and you can only have one employer so no temp work), but they could get an offer of employment from the menial work they did for extra money as a student. Many are now stuck in those positions as their education is slowly fading into obscurity.
In reality they needed to be inclusive saying how they want to hear everyone's opinions and how they take those concepts into account when making policy. Basically, the public responses have just reinforced the complaints that the author had with the programs in the first place. (Especially Sarah Mei, who basically just called him names and insulted his intelligence without any sort of direct rebuttal to his claims.)
I Don't know who Sara Mei is but she does not seem to work at google. This is how google’s new Vice President of Diversity, Integrity & Governance, Danielle Brown reponded internally and the way I read it it seems just like the apropriate response you where looking for.
Googlers
I’m Danielle, Google’s brand new VP of Diversity, Integrity & Governance. I started just a couple of weeks ago, and I had hoped to take another week or so to get the lay of the land before introducing myself to you all. But given the heated debate we’ve seen over the past few days, I feel compelled to say a few words.
Many of you have read an internal document shared by someone in our engineering organization, expressing views on the natural abilities and characteristics of different genders, as well as whether one can speak freely of these things at Google. And like many of you, I found that it advanced incorrect assumptions about gender. I’m not going to link to it here as it’s not a viewpoint that I or this company endorses, promotes or encourages.
Diversity and inclusion are a fundamental part of our values and the culture we continue to cultivate. We are unequivocal in our belief that diversity and inclusion are critical to our success as a company, and we’ll continue to stand for that and be committed to it for the long haul. As Ari Balogh said in his internal G+ post, “Building an open, inclusive environment is core to who we are, and the right thing to do. ‘Nuff said. “
Google has taken a strong stand on this issue, by releasing its demographic data and creating a company wide OKR on diversity and inclusion. Strong stands elicit strong reactions. Changing a culture is hard, and it’s often uncomfortable. But I firmly believe Google is doing the right thing, and that’s why I took this job.
Part of building an open, inclusive environment means fostering a culture in which those with alternative views, including different political views, feel safe sharing their opinions. But that discourse needs to work alongside the principles of equal employment found in our Code of Conduct, policies, and anti-discrimination laws.
I’ve been in the industry for a long time, and I can tell you that I’ve never worked at a company that has so many platforms for employees to express themselves—TGIF, Memegen, internal G+, thousands of discussion groups. I know this conversation doesn’t end with my email today. I look forward to continuing to hear your thoughts as I settle in and meet with Googlers across the company.
Thanks,
Danielle
When you hire a person you hire a particular individual with more or less unique traits. Going from the general to the particular can easely lead you astray.
Ponder this: The average car has a manual clutch and you need two feet to control it. The average woman has less than two feet.
But the conclution that we need to stop trying to recruit female drivers as on average they just physically can't drive a normal car without special adaptation is hopfully to all obviously and totally ridiculous.
OPs point was that the there is an overhelming effort to suppress other viewpoints. My point is that this is not the case as those exact viewpoints are being published and discussed here and in many other places and as I've pointed out to others, if any viewpoint is missing please feel free to chime in with those views rather than just anonymously posting that they have views that they are somehow not able to state.
Your post is a bit to long to reply to in detail, but I'll say this, your place of work is not a free speach zone. If you employer does not have policies in place to create a good working environment, or does not follow them or make such polices when pointed out to them you are probable better off at another place of work. There simply cannot be made enough legislation to prevent an employer from being an idiot.
I'm not taking a position on whether or not he will be fired, I don't know. My claim is that his views have not been silenced and whatever effort have been done to do so has quite obviously not had any effect. Although I cannot prove it, I might even go out on a limb an say that the danger for him of losing his job has contributed to a disproportionate attention to his views (as support for this I can only refer to the number of times it has been mentioned in the debate).
She gravitates towards dolls, picture books of people, and wants to be held/cuddled a lot. He gravitates towards cars, dump trucks/loaders, blocks, picture books of trucks and construction sites, and only wants to be held if it involves tumbling, tossing, and spinning..
The parent posts (pun unintended) point was that
Little boy play is competitive, little girl play is cooperative and egalitarian.
I'm just curious to know if you interpret their play in similar terms as well (as you seem to agree but it is not obvious from your description).
Studies on children and fairness are abundant. http://www.webmd.com/children/... link to the first hit on duckduckgo.
its not a problem though thats what we are trying to get you to understand. people can choose to do what they want to do
Although an honourable view on life, here is a reality check! You're stating this in a discussion about an article containing the sentence. "It attributes the gender gap in technology to biology-based differences in abilities (such as "speaking up" and "leading") and different personality traits (including "neuroticism")."
I see plenty who agree with him in this thread, and I'm quite certain similar points will be argued publicly again. In fact I'm willing to bet on it, will you bet against?
So when (if) he is fired, this and similar will never be discussed again? How large of a bet are you willing to take?
Hey, he means presented in a loaded way where it can't be discussed relationally but must be automatically rejected by all because of disingenuous associations.
Be honest of yourself, ever hear someone call conservatives "nazi" or "fascists " or anything else to both increase their victimhood, increase the Them/Us mentality and make even entertaining the conversation social suicide.
The terms "nazi" and "fascist" are as of now in this thread at only mentioned by you? As the 2 references to "feminazis" can't very well further your agenda of victimization I'd just add that "sjw" counts 41 in this thread and that we both share a hope that a more meaningful discussion will follow.
Frankly, right now it does seem like - on both sides of the political spectrum - many people's default response to anything they don't like is to attempt shouting it down.
I certainly agree to that. And since no side is showing any sign of succeding in that particular effort, I'd really like an end to posts and articles claiming that you can't debate certain issues, when they are debated right there and then. It makes no sense and does not add to the discussion.