The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
Was Sergey Brin's Ex-Sister-In-Law the Driving Force in Getting James Damore Canned?
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New Reply
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

From Recode, the first purportedly inside account of who was behind firing coder James Damore for crimethink:

How CEO Sundar Pichai made the decision to fire James Damore was just as hard as Google’s all-hands meeting today will be

As it turned out, the meeting wasn’t hard at all because Pinchai cancelled it.

Pichai’s management team did not at first agree on what to do.

BY KARA SWISHER @KARASWISHER AUG 10, 2017, 1:00PM

Let’s all assume Google CEO Sundar Pichai has a really hard day ahead of him.

That’s because at 4 pm PT, the tech giant will hold an all-hands meeting to discuss the firing of James Damore and the controversial internal memo he wrote about women and their biological weaknesses related to tech that got him canned from the company. …

Pichai made the final decision about Damore’s fate, after what several sources with knowledge of the meeting characterized as a tough debate by top management, with initial disagreement over how to handle the situation. …

According to those familiar with the discussion, his dozen direct reports whom he consulted were initially at odds about what to do about Google’s continual and complex balancing act between free speech and fostering a safe workplace.

“Just like all of Google is struggling with this, we were not unanimous at first about whether what [Damore] wrote merited firing, although we all came around to it,” said one top exec. “But Sundar had to make a call about what kind of Google he wanted to stress and he did.”

Others familiar with the meeting said it centered on how much latitude employees should have to express their opinions — one of the central tenets of Google since its founding — versus creating a culture that is trying to become attractive and safe to a broader range of people.

“I think the problem and also benefit of Google has been that we’ve created and encouraged an environment where everyone thinks they can say what they want, because that is what has always been the way it has been,” said another top exec. “But, at some point, if we really want to change, we have to think harder about what impact that has, especially when it makes women or others feel unsafe in the environment we have created.”

So this is all tied into the paranoid delusions over Safe Spaces and wearing Safety Pins after Trump’s election.

Violent memos.

It’s a split reflected at the very top of Google’s owner, Alphabet, where its top lawyer, David Drummond, has been one of the most vocal advocates of free speech over the years. As an Alphabet exec, he was not part of Monday’s decision-making meeting.

Meanwhile, another longtime Google leader, YouTube CEO Susan Wojcicki, who was at the meeting, penned her own essay that appeared in Fortune this week, with an opposite take.

“While people may have a right to express their beliefs in public, that does not mean companies cannot take action when women are subjected to comments that perpetuate negative stereotypes about them based on their gender,” she wrote. “Every day, companies take action against employees who make unlawful statements about co-workers, or create hostile work environments.” …

In fact, Damore posted the essay earlier in one of Google’s smaller discussion platforms — not one like its massive “eng-misc” one — before it bubbled up this past weekend and was finally noticed by top execs.

Alerted to it, sources said Pichai then started off gathering opinions from his direct reports — such as Wojcicki, HR head Eileen Naughton, top lawyer Kent Walker, cloud leader Diane Greene, communications head Jessica Powell and business head Philipp Schindler. Not all were physically present at Google’s Silicon Valley HQ, where the group debated the issue, and were at first split.

“It was a cordial discussion, considering the topic, and you could see how you could argue both sides on the face of it,” said one source. “But I think Damore’s focus on biology really made it clear that he had crossed the line.”

What turned the tide, said sources, was when it was noted that if Damore’s dubious contentions about women’s skills were replaced by those about race or religion, there would be no debate.

In fact, Wojcicki said as much in her essay:

“For instance, what if we replaced the word ‘women’ in the memo with another group? What if the memo said that biological differences amongst Black, Hispanic, or LGBTQ employees explained their underrepresentation in tech and leadership roles? Would some people still be discussing the merit of the memo’s arguments or would there be a universal call for swift action against its author? I don’t ask this to compare one group to another, but rather to point out that the language of discrimination can take many different forms and none are acceptable or productive.” …

So it sounds as if Wojcicki was, at least according to Swisher’s initial reporting, the winner in this internal power struggle.

Said one flatly: “He cannot spew his dubious biology arguments — you can find any study to justify any crazy notion — and not pay a price for it.”

Pichai wrote to employees on Monday and said as much, but much more politely: “To suggest a group of our colleagues have traits that make them less biologically suited to that work is offensive and not OK.”

As I mentioned yesterday, YouTube CEO Susan Wojcicki, who remains deeply resentful of any time her abilities have been questioned during her lucrative career, is the former sister-in-law of Google co-founder Sergey Brin.

After all, if we don’t shut this kind of talk down right now, some punk bastard might even mention … nepotism!

 
Hide 142 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
    []
  1. EriK says:

    YouTube loses money hand over fist.

    Read More
    • Replies: @jon

    YouTube loses money hand over fist.
     
    They pretty much all do, but they are still billionaires.
    , @Eagle Eye

    Pichai then started off gathering opinions from his direct reports — such as
    1.[Youtube honchette Susan] Wojcicki [haven't we heard that last name somewhere?],
    2. HR head Eileen Naughton, ...
    3. communications head Jessica Powell ...
     
    In other words:
    1. Boss's sister-in-law/movie lady
    2. HR lady
    3. Press lady/spokeswoman.

    How much more stereotyped can one get? Shouldn't there be at least 50% men in these roles?

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
    AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
    These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
    Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
    Sharing Comment via Twitter
    /isteve/was-sergey-brins-ex-sister-in-law-the-driving-force-in-getting-james-damore-canned/#comment-1963834
    More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  2. The racial gap is actually far more pronounced than the gender gap at Google.

    Black make up 1% of tech roles at Goole… is it 0.4% rounded to 1%?
    How many of these blacks are actually 25%, 50% or 75% white ancestry.
    Steve Jobs was panicked at the lack of black engineers at Apple. It’s universal, not Google specific.

    But Charles Murray has been debunked right?

    Another gender stereotype: why Google founder Sergey Brin ditched his 40+ yr old wife for a new 20-something girlfriend?
    Is it because older men with money are attracted to young fertile female and vice-versa? You rarely see the opposite… I wonder why….

    Read More
    • Replies: @Charles Erwin Wilson
    Sergey Brin is the smartest guy in the universe! Just ask him. So for Sergey to be constrained by any strictures constructed by lesser intellects (and you know Sergey think there are at least 7+ billion lessers on Planet Earth) would be a disservice to his brilliance! So the 20 year old current squeeze will be replaced in 10 years by a 20 year old squeeze. And with medical technology Sergey will do the same for at least seven more times.

    And for all of that Sergey won't be happy. For Sergey to be happy, you must be unhappy. Otherwise Sergey isn't the smartest guy in the universe.

    I am happy about this, because I know Sergey will be unhappy forever, just like his soulmates Stalin, Castro and the Kim Norks.
    , @Dave Pinsen

    Steve Jobs was panicked at the lack of black engineers at Apple.
     
    Was he? I know of a black Carnegie Mellon CS alumnus who worked as an intern at Apple (and, presumably, wasn't offered a permanent job, because he didn't work there after). He was there when Steve Jobs was alive (he blogged about sitting behind Jobs during a cafeteria conversation).
    , @Anonymous
    Is it because older men with money are attracted to young fertile female and vice-versa? You rarely see the opposite… I wonder why….

    Don't tell Chrissie. She thinks she's still a prize!

    https://vimeo.com/12923066


    He was learning how to stand
    when I wore my first wedding band...
    , @anonymous coward

    Is it because older men with money are attracted to young fertile female and vice-versa? You rarely see the opposite… I wonder why….
     
    "Rarely see the opposite"?? Practically every rich old female actress or singer has a young and fertile trophy husband.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  3. Lot says:

    Lots of data about immigration and deportation under Trump:

    https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/8/10/16119910/trump-deportations-obama

    Good news: the numbers of illegals caught at the border has dropped by about 50% under Trump. That means fewer are trying. Trump’s rhetoric, even though he has not followed through on most of it, has had a powerful deterrent effect. If half all illegals get apprehended at the border, this implies that the new illegal population will fall by about 140,000 in 2017.

    Bad news: the number of those already here getting deported each month has actually dropped under Trump. That is mostly because the easy deportations on the border have dropped so much.

    I’ve called some of the immigration proposals vaporware, especially the really stupid ones to increase the already very heavy federal penalties for illegal entry after deportation. The article points to two proposals that are realistic and would actually result in much larger numbers of deportations.

    The first is to increase the deportation infrastructure, specifically the number of prosecutors and the number of BIA judges. BIA appeals go to regular federal judges, so we’d need more of those too. Without doing this, showy ICE raids of illegals does nothing to increase deportations.

    Increasing the deportation infrastructure is something that could actually pass Congress. Indeed, there have been several moderate increases lately.

    But the most promising possibility is something Trump could do via executive-branch regulation:

    It would be much simpler, and much more efficient, to make it easier to deport people without court hearings — by expanding the process currently used for Mexican border-crossers to apply to other immigrants as well. That can be done by rewriting the regulations that determine who qualifies for “expedited removal.”

    Currently, immigrants caught within 100 miles of the border can be “expedited” out of the US unless they can prove that they’ve been in the US for at least two weeks. But the administration is allowed to expand that to cover immigrants caught anywhere in the country — and to force immigrants to prove two years of residence in the US to be allowed to stay.

    The executive orders signed by President Trump in January opened the door to such an expansion, but the Department of Homeland Security hasn’t announced any plans to change the regulations. It’s possible that DHS will only moderately expand the use of expedited removal. But it’s also possible that the Trump administration will get so fed up with the roadblock that immigration courts present to its deportation agenda that it will do everything it can to avoid the courts entirely.

    This is why Rick Perry at DHS would be a disaster. His record in Texas is not supporting the rule of law, but of giving illegals in-state tuition and calling Mitt Romney heartless for disagreeing with him.

    Read More
    • Replies: @MEH 0910
    A Surge of Migrants Crossing Into Quebec Tests Canada’s Welcome

    MONTREAL — The crowd of asylum seekers who gathered the other day outside this city’s Olympic Stadium, their temporary home, hailed from across the globe. They had fled violence, poverty, persecution and, some say, President Trump, often with only a suitcase to their name and a wisp of hope that Canada will allow them to stay.

    They are part of a new surge of mostly Haitian migrants who have illegally crossed into Quebec by the hundreds every day over the past several weeks, walking over a ditch at the end of a dead-end road in upstate New York. They are seeking to benefit from a loophole in a treaty between the two countries that allows them to make refugee claims in Canada if they do not arrive at legal ports of entry.
     

    “Canada is portrayed as very welcoming, but we’re not open to every kind of immigrants,” said Mireille Paquet, an expert on immigration policy at Concordia University in Montreal. “Being poor is not a reason to get refugee protection.”

    Nonetheless, refugee advocates say the government is essentially encouraging people to come into the country — and to bypass the treaty — by setting up processing centers at popular illegal crossing points, and arranging for shelter.

    The Canadian military announced on Wednesday that it would build a camp for 500 asylum seekers near the Quebec-United States border. Last week, the authorities opened the temporary housing center in the stadium, with space for 1,050 beds until September.

    On a recent visit to the border crossing in Champlain, N.Y., taxicabs arrived at the dead end of Roxham Road practically every 15 minutes, stopping a few feet from a ditch that separates the United States and Canada. The passengers clutched their luggage, ignored a “no pedestrians” sign and made the short walk into Quebec.

    Royal Canadian Mounted Police officers are supposed to warn those arriving here that they will be arrested for breaking international law by crossing illegally. But one officer instead greeted the migrants with a simple question: “Are you from Haiti?”

    Some of the migrants said concerns about the immigration policies of Mr. Trump had convinced them that Canada was their only option. Deportations of undocumented Haitian immigrants, though, were ordered to resume under the Obama administration.
     

    Around 1,500 asylum seekers crossed into Quebec in July, up from 781 in June, Quebec officials said. Over 200 are now arriving every day, according to the Canada Border Services Agency, which said many were American children accompanying their undocumented parents.

    But Jean-Pierre Fortin, president of the Customs and Immigration Union, which represents Canadian border service agents, said agents had told him that the number of people crossing was much higher than the government’s figures.

    Around 900 breakfast meals were distributed on Tuesday to asylum seekers held at the border crossing in the town of Saint-Bernard-de-Lacolle, he said, and agents have been brought in from across Canada to assist with processing refugee claims.

    “In 18 years on the front line, I’ve never seen a crisis like this,” he said.

    In May, the Trump administration announced that it planned to end a humanitarian program, Temporary Protected Status, that allowed 58,000 Haitians to remain in the United States after the devastating 2010 earthquake. That month, John F. Kelly, then the Homeland Security secretary and now the White House chief of staff, extended the program six more months, through January.

    Haitian migrants and advocates in Montreal say the recent wave of asylum seekers was spurred by false information spread on social media claiming that Canada is automatically accepting people who have been safeguarded by Temporary Protected Status in the United States.

    Last year, the Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada accepted 50 percent of refugee claims made by Haitians, the agency said. And according to the Canada Border Services Agency, since Canada resumed deportations of Haitians in March, 19 Haitian citizens have been sent back to Haiti, and 277 to the United States under the treaty between the two countries.

    Yet asylum seekers still believe they have a better chance in Canada. That impression has been bolstered by the polite treatment they receive once they cross the border.

    “When you arrive, you’re not detained as a prisoner,” said Marjorie Villefranche, director of Maison d’Haiti, a Haitian community organization in Montreal.

    Although they are formally arrested, the migrants get temporary papers, a bus pass and a monthly government stipend of up to 900 Canadian dollars (about $705), which can help pay rent while they wait for their refugee claim hearing.
     
    , @Jack Hanson
    No Lot, the reason that there are less getting deported is because the Trump Admin isnt calling VRs "deportations". Now that they're cutting that out, you see a similar drop in apps that you do in faux deportations.

    10th Circuit is taking every 8 USC 1325 case that crosses its desk, as well as every 1326a1, b1, and b2 case. This was unthinkable in the Obama era.
    , @Dave, From Oz
    As I suggest everywhere this topic comes up: prosecute large-scale employers of illegal aliens under the RICO act. An orchard industry that relies on illegal labour almost certainly dabbles in immigration fraud: one of the specific crimes mentioned in the act. An industry that systemically from top to bottom relies on crime to operate, that could not continue with its current practices without criminal activity, is precisely what a "corrupt organization" *is*.

    Start throwing the bosses of large, billion-dollar agricultural corporations in prison for racketeering. Oh, and have the local cops start going after people who hire illegal alien household servants, fry cooks, etc.

    You don't need new laws: you just need to start enforcing the laws you already have, with the goal that people will start - you know - obeying them. What a shame the USA has mostly destroyed its unions. A few teamsters fighting for their jobs would sort out the illegals.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  4. Women take everything too personally.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dwright
    The Occam's comment boiled down to it's essence. Yes, they do.
    , @James Richard
    Ya' think?
    , @anonguy

    Women take everything too personally.
     
    A more value-neutral and objective way of making your assertion would be women have a tendency to take things more personally than do men.

    Whether this is good or not is removed from the statement. You obviously think it is bad, while whoever designed women must have thought it good, if it is indeed true as you assert.

    That leads to two questions:

    1) Upon what do you base your claim that women take things more personally than men?

    2) Why is this bad? If it were bad, why would it be a pervasive trait of females assuming it does actually exist.
    , @Father O'Hara
    Women take everything. FIFY.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  5. JohnnyD says:

    Ironically, Wojcicki has proven Darmore’s point repeatedly by acting like such a drama queen.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  6. Pichai wrote to employees on Monday and said as much, but much more politely: “To suggest a group of our colleagues have traits that make them less biologically suited to that work is offensive and not OK.”

    I can’t hear the last sentence in anything but a female voice. Has a man ever said “offensive and not OK”?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Ivy
    "Not OK".
    That was the language of pre-schoolers when they were first learning to use their words.
    , @Alden
    liberal progressive men say things like offensive, not ok and my favorite, " that's scary" all the time.

    Liberal men aren't gay, but neither are they real men. We need a new word for liberal White men. How about race traitor?
    , @Chrisnonymous
    I imagine Pichai talking to Damore sounds something like this...

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VN29X2HCKpU
    , @DFH
    Women love these words because 'not OK' refers to the violation of social norms (rather than what's actually true).
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  7. JerryC says:

    Said one flatly: “He cannot spew his dubious biology arguments — you can find any study to justify any crazy notion — and not pay a price for it.”

    Love this. Men and women being different is now just some crazy notion that nutjobs believe in, like the History Channel alien guy with the crazy hair. We are truly living in bizarro world now.

    Read More
    • Replies: @White Guy In Japan
    Typical. I brought up race/IQ data and the others went wild. 1. They thought this was my idea 2. Called it wild and far-fetched 3. Accused me of making up the numbers.

    It occurred to me that the others in the discussion (mainly Millenials) have never heard of this and/or think it is all crazy fantasy stuff.
    , @San Fernando Curt
    Whoa! The Hedge Head? He's the best! Well... boom!... I'm triggered!
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  8. Polynikes says:

    They should’ve suspended the guy a couple weeks and sent him to sensitivity training and it would’ve all blown over. Pro sports figured this long ago.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  9. Dwright says:
    @Daniel Chieh
    Women take everything too personally.

    The Occam’s comment boiled down to it’s essence. Yes, they do.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  10. Raekwon says:

    “To suggest a group of our colleagues have traits that make them less biologically suited to that work is offensive and not OK.”

    Except that the women who are googlers are ostensibly biologically suited for google.

    Time for the ol’ comp sci joke: There are 10 types of people in this world. Those who understand statistics (normal distribution, standard deviation, kurtosis, skewness, mean, mode, r^2, p etc.) and those who don’t.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Alec Leamas (hard at work)

    Except that the women who are googlers are ostensibly biologically suited for google.

     
    Maybe so, but maybe they've been boosted by the Diversity initiatives that irk Damore.

    It's sort of well known in BigLaw that the diversity hires have a shelf life - very, very few become equity partners, and the best behaved ones go on to jobs within the firm like "director of minority recruiting" or "director of pro-bono services." Their non-diversity hire peers get to do the heavy lifting to make up for the lost productivity of having an attorney without the requisite aptitude to do actual high level legal work.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  11. MikeW says:

    If I had been at that executive meeting, I would have said, fire the jerk. If he’s got major problems with something we consider core corporate policy, tell him to find an employer closer to his values.

    And that’s what I would tell the public. NOT this nonsense about hurtful remarks, implying that women have fragile egos that need special care and coddling from upper management.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Pericles
    "Have you looked at the badges on our caps recently? ... Are we the baddies?"
    , @AndrewR
    I hope you are never allowed any supervisory position ever.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  12. Dave Pinsen says: • Website

    Said one flatly: “He cannot spew his dubious biology arguments — you can find any study to justify any crazy notion — and not pay a price for it.”

    I don’t think they’ve quite thought through the implications of this sort of squishy epistemology.

    Anyhow, there’s a simple solution to this kerfuffle:

    Make Alphabet’s US workforce look like America: 50% women, 13% black, etc.

    Read More
    • Replies: @David
    And 50% of payroll to women, 13% to blacks, etc.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  13. Whiskey says: • Website

    Again more evidence that women are the natural and eternal enemy of White men; at least Upper Class White women and those who aspire to that status or follow them. White women have broadly allied themselves with non-Whites against the mutual hated enemy: White men. Who are HATE HATE HATED for being fractionally smarter than their non-White male peers, for the most part.

    Why all the anti-White male venom? Because White men are simply too higher IQ to engage in the domination rituals and highly aggressive physical personal behavior in men that White women crave; and so the excuses and ritual abasements before Muslims, Black men, etc. Duh.

    TLDR: White women broke up with Beta Male Bob to get with Wife-Beater Ahmed. Who only hits them because he loves them and makes other men afraid. That’s it. And that’s public and private policy in government and corporations writ large. There is no end of ways in which White women are the natural and eternal enemy of White men. Which means the dominance bid by White men must go up marginally much higher than the competition.

    Google will likely be nearly White male free in the engineering / tech dept in two years time, I’ll bet. And will crater in that time as well, technically at least. I’ve switched to Bing; and I expect a lot of people to do so as well.

    Read More
    • Replies: @MBlanc46
    You've probably over-egged the pudding by a tad, but there's much to what you say. The hostility that white women have directed against white men for the past fifty years demonstrates beyond question that they despise us.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  14. Cagey Beast says: • Website

    James Damore would have led Qaddafi style, Viagra-fuelled, alt-right rape squads on the Google campus if he hadn’t been stopped in time. He probably would have ridden around Silicon Valley on a horse with his shirt off too, just like his paymaster, Putin.

    Read More
    • LOL: BB753, AndrewR
    • Replies: @AndrewR
    Oops I meant to hit "LOL." Webmaster, can we get an option to undo reactions?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  15. Jack D says:

    “I think the problem and also benefit of Google has been that we’ve created and encouraged an environment where everyone thinks they can say what they want, because that is what has always been the way it has been,” said another top exec. “But, at some point, if we really want to change, we have to think harder about what impact that has, especially when it makes women or others feel unsafe in the environment we have created.”

    This is the money quote. This was not just canning some nobody. It was crossing the Rubicon, the turning point from which there is no going back. Before this week, Google was an organization where the most important value was speaking the truth, getting stuff done. But now it is just another libtard nursery where the most important value is to create a “safe space” for their infantile charges. This is the day that marks the beginning of the end at Google.

    Read More
    • Replies: @The Last Real Calvinist
    Yes -- '. . . if we really want to change . . .' is the turning point.

    This is a clear signal that Google's senior management has committed to bog-variety leftist utopia-building as their core mission.

    It's in notable contrast to their detached, negatively-stated original 'Don't be evil' mantra.

    , @Desiderius

    Google was an organization where the most important value was speaking the truth
     
    Notice when they talk about free speech (i.e. free thought) now they don't say,"speaking the truth," they say, "saying what you want." Always moving goalposts.
    , @JW
    There's much ruin in a company. Google has several monopolies, it's not clear market forces can dethrone them. Intel has been going down Google's path for years and years. Google's VP of diversity came from Intel.
    , @Lurker
    Yes. It's a turning point. We all know Google is just another crappy company but until now one could sort of be carried along by the image of it being something special. They've killed that and killed it in the eyes of geek/nerd types who might have been supportive or worked there.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  16. @Quebecois race realist
    The racial gap is actually far more pronounced than the gender gap at Google.

    Black make up 1% of tech roles at Goole... is it 0.4% rounded to 1%?
    How many of these blacks are actually 25%, 50% or 75% white ancestry.
    Steve Jobs was panicked at the lack of black engineers at Apple. It's universal, not Google specific.

    But Charles Murray has been debunked right?

    Another gender stereotype: why Google founder Sergey Brin ditched his 40+ yr old wife for a new 20-something girlfriend?
    Is it because older men with money are attracted to young fertile female and vice-versa? You rarely see the opposite... I wonder why....

    Sergey Brin is the smartest guy in the universe! Just ask him. So for Sergey to be constrained by any strictures constructed by lesser intellects (and you know Sergey think there are at least 7+ billion lessers on Planet Earth) would be a disservice to his brilliance! So the 20 year old current squeeze will be replaced in 10 years by a 20 year old squeeze. And with medical technology Sergey will do the same for at least seven more times.

    And for all of that Sergey won’t be happy. For Sergey to be happy, you must be unhappy. Otherwise Sergey isn’t the smartest guy in the universe.

    I am happy about this, because I know Sergey will be unhappy forever, just like his soulmates Stalin, Castro and the Kim Norks.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  17. Jack D says:

    Wojcicki said, “What if the memo said that biological differences amongst Black, Hispanic, or LGBTQ employees explained their underrepresentation in tech and leadership roles?”

    Wojcicki wants women to be victims in good standing in the Coalition of the Fringes. It’s not going to work Susan. The others have noticed that you are sleeping with the enemy and they don’t trust you.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  18. David says:
    @Dave Pinsen

    Said one flatly: “He cannot spew his dubious biology arguments — you can find any study to justify any crazy notion — and not pay a price for it.”
     
    I don't think they've quite thought through the implications of this sort of squishy epistemology.

    Anyhow, there's a simple solution to this kerfuffle:

    Make Alphabet's US workforce look like America: 50% women, 13% black, etc.

    And 50% of payroll to women, 13% to blacks, etc.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  19. MEH 0910 says:
    @Lot
    Lots of data about immigration and deportation under Trump:

    https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/8/10/16119910/trump-deportations-obama

    Good news: the numbers of illegals caught at the border has dropped by about 50% under Trump. That means fewer are trying. Trump's rhetoric, even though he has not followed through on most of it, has had a powerful deterrent effect. If half all illegals get apprehended at the border, this implies that the new illegal population will fall by about 140,000 in 2017.

    Bad news: the number of those already here getting deported each month has actually dropped under Trump. That is mostly because the easy deportations on the border have dropped so much.

    I've called some of the immigration proposals vaporware, especially the really stupid ones to increase the already very heavy federal penalties for illegal entry after deportation. The article points to two proposals that are realistic and would actually result in much larger numbers of deportations.

    The first is to increase the deportation infrastructure, specifically the number of prosecutors and the number of BIA judges. BIA appeals go to regular federal judges, so we'd need more of those too. Without doing this, showy ICE raids of illegals does nothing to increase deportations.

    Increasing the deportation infrastructure is something that could actually pass Congress. Indeed, there have been several moderate increases lately.

    But the most promising possibility is something Trump could do via executive-branch regulation:

    It would be much simpler, and much more efficient, to make it easier to deport people without court hearings — by expanding the process currently used for Mexican border-crossers to apply to other immigrants as well. That can be done by rewriting the regulations that determine who qualifies for “expedited removal.”

    Currently, immigrants caught within 100 miles of the border can be “expedited” out of the US unless they can prove that they’ve been in the US for at least two weeks. But the administration is allowed to expand that to cover immigrants caught anywhere in the country — and to force immigrants to prove two years of residence in the US to be allowed to stay.

    The executive orders signed by President Trump in January opened the door to such an expansion, but the Department of Homeland Security hasn’t announced any plans to change the regulations. It’s possible that DHS will only moderately expand the use of expedited removal. But it’s also possible that the Trump administration will get so fed up with the roadblock that immigration courts present to its deportation agenda that it will do everything it can to avoid the courts entirely.
     
    This is why Rick Perry at DHS would be a disaster. His record in Texas is not supporting the rule of law, but of giving illegals in-state tuition and calling Mitt Romney heartless for disagreeing with him.

    A Surge of Migrants Crossing Into Quebec Tests Canada’s Welcome

    MONTREAL — The crowd of asylum seekers who gathered the other day outside this city’s Olympic Stadium, their temporary home, hailed from across the globe. They had fled violence, poverty, persecution and, some say, President Trump, often with only a suitcase to their name and a wisp of hope that Canada will allow them to stay.

    They are part of a new surge of mostly Haitian migrants who have illegally crossed into Quebec by the hundreds every day over the past several weeks, walking over a ditch at the end of a dead-end road in upstate New York. They are seeking to benefit from a loophole in a treaty between the two countries that allows them to make refugee claims in Canada if they do not arrive at legal ports of entry.

    [MORE]

    “Canada is portrayed as very welcoming, but we’re not open to every kind of immigrants,” said Mireille Paquet, an expert on immigration policy at Concordia University in Montreal. “Being poor is not a reason to get refugee protection.”

    Nonetheless, refugee advocates say the government is essentially encouraging people to come into the country — and to bypass the treaty — by setting up processing centers at popular illegal crossing points, and arranging for shelter.

    The Canadian military announced on Wednesday that it would build a camp for 500 asylum seekers near the Quebec-United States border. Last week, the authorities opened the temporary housing center in the stadium, with space for 1,050 beds until September.

    On a recent visit to the border crossing in Champlain, N.Y., taxicabs arrived at the dead end of Roxham Road practically every 15 minutes, stopping a few feet from a ditch that separates the United States and Canada. The passengers clutched their luggage, ignored a “no pedestrians” sign and made the short walk into Quebec.

    Royal Canadian Mounted Police officers are supposed to warn those arriving here that they will be arrested for breaking international law by crossing illegally. But one officer instead greeted the migrants with a simple question: “Are you from Haiti?”

    Some of the migrants said concerns about the immigration policies of Mr. Trump had convinced them that Canada was their only option. Deportations of undocumented Haitian immigrants, though, were ordered to resume under the Obama administration.

    Around 1,500 asylum seekers crossed into Quebec in July, up from 781 in June, Quebec officials said. Over 200 are now arriving every day, according to the Canada Border Services Agency, which said many were American children accompanying their undocumented parents.

    But Jean-Pierre Fortin, president of the Customs and Immigration Union, which represents Canadian border service agents, said agents had told him that the number of people crossing was much higher than the government’s figures.

    Around 900 breakfast meals were distributed on Tuesday to asylum seekers held at the border crossing in the town of Saint-Bernard-de-Lacolle, he said, and agents have been brought in from across Canada to assist with processing refugee claims.

    “In 18 years on the front line, I’ve never seen a crisis like this,” he said.

    In May, the Trump administration announced that it planned to end a humanitarian program, Temporary Protected Status, that allowed 58,000 Haitians to remain in the United States after the devastating 2010 earthquake. That month, John F. Kelly, then the Homeland Security secretary and now the White House chief of staff, extended the program six more months, through January.

    Haitian migrants and advocates in Montreal say the recent wave of asylum seekers was spurred by false information spread on social media claiming that Canada is automatically accepting people who have been safeguarded by Temporary Protected Status in the United States.

    Last year, the Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada accepted 50 percent of refugee claims made by Haitians, the agency said. And according to the Canada Border Services Agency, since Canada resumed deportations of Haitians in March, 19 Haitian citizens have been sent back to Haiti, and 277 to the United States under the treaty between the two countries.

    Yet asylum seekers still believe they have a better chance in Canada. That impression has been bolstered by the polite treatment they receive once they cross the border.

    “When you arrive, you’re not detained as a prisoner,” said Marjorie Villefranche, director of Maison d’Haiti, a Haitian community organization in Montreal.

    Although they are formally arrested, the migrants get temporary papers, a bus pass and a monthly government stipend of up to 900 Canadian dollars (about $705), which can help pay rent while they wait for their refugee claim hearing.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  20. Ivy says:
    @TelfoedJohn

    Pichai wrote to employees on Monday and said as much, but much more politely: “To suggest a group of our colleagues have traits that make them less biologically suited to that work is offensive and not OK.”
     
    I can't hear the last sentence in anything but a female voice. Has a man ever said "offensive and not OK"?

    “Not OK”.
    That was the language of pre-schoolers when they were first learning to use their words.

    Read More
    • LOL: BB753
    • Replies: @StillCARealist
    yeah, that's what I was thinking. He's talking to the employees like they're children. That's not OK.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  21. Hugh says:

    Pichai’s position is as follows:

    1) There are no biological differences between men and women from an IT standpoint.

    2) Pichai is CEO of Google and therefore ultimately responsible for hiring.

    3) Google/Pichai has hired a workforce that is 80% male in its more techy areas.

    4) It therefore follows that Pichai is a horrible misogynist and should be fired too.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  22. @Daniel Chieh
    Women take everything too personally.

    Ya’ think?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  23. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    Will someone tell me why I’m wrong to see a common theme w/r/t Jewish-run institutions like Google acting with a strong authoritarian hand against diversity heretics and other Jewish-run/derived systems like communism and Christianity’s similar stifling of wrongthink/heresy, not to mention the comparable characteristics that are present among Arabs/within Islam? It seems to me that this type of authoritarian way of running the show, pushing non-reality-based ideologies on others, and then punishing dissenters is behavior that is perhaps more prevalent in Semites than others, no?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dave Pinsen
    Google is run by an Indian-American, Sundar Pichai. The executive chairman of its parent company, Alphabet, is a German-American gentile named Eric Schmidt. The two Jewish co-founders serve below him as president and CEO, respectively.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  24. Steve,

    Great work on the biggest, non-nuclear story in the world right now. Will you have a chance to do a round-up post on the interesting developments at the IAAF championships? It’s far afield from SV but it’s interesting to see an Azeri/Turkish guy win the 200 m and a Norwegian dude win the 400 m hurdles. Link

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  25. Dave Pinsen says: • Website
    @Quebecois race realist
    The racial gap is actually far more pronounced than the gender gap at Google.

    Black make up 1% of tech roles at Goole... is it 0.4% rounded to 1%?
    How many of these blacks are actually 25%, 50% or 75% white ancestry.
    Steve Jobs was panicked at the lack of black engineers at Apple. It's universal, not Google specific.

    But Charles Murray has been debunked right?

    Another gender stereotype: why Google founder Sergey Brin ditched his 40+ yr old wife for a new 20-something girlfriend?
    Is it because older men with money are attracted to young fertile female and vice-versa? You rarely see the opposite... I wonder why....

    Steve Jobs was panicked at the lack of black engineers at Apple.

    Was he? I know of a black Carnegie Mellon CS alumnus who worked as an intern at Apple (and, presumably, wasn’t offered a permanent job, because he didn’t work there after). He was there when Steve Jobs was alive (he blogged about sitting behind Jobs during a cafeteria conversation).

    Read More
    • Replies: @Quebecois race realist

    Steve quickly asked, “Do you have an engineering program?”
    “We have a dual engineering program with universities such as Georgia Tech and Michigan,” I told him.
    “Can you help us hire black engineers?” he said. “Do you know how many black engineers we have?”
    Before I could say anything he shared a shockingly low number and confessed how poorly Apple was doing in finding black candidates. I’ll skip the full exchange, but suffice it to say, I got an intimate peek into Steve’s passion and energy. He was seriously upset at Apple’s efforts in that area. His last words to me that day were, “If you have any ideas on how we can hire more black engineers, send me an email.”
     
    source:
    https://urbanfaith.com/2011/10/steve-jobs-passion-for-diversity.html/

    Clearly it was not lack of trying.
    , @San Fernando Curt
    Perhaps - and this seem pretty common among titans of today - it was a matter of Jobs being publicly panicked at the lack of Apple duskiness. Privately - and so honestly - perhaps he really didn't give a damn. He was a major component putting computers in every home in the world. I find it easy to believe the travails of chronic whiners left him cold.
    , @anonguy

    I know of a black Carnegie Mellon CS alumnus who worked as an intern at Apple (and, presumably, wasn’t offered a permanent job, because he didn’t work there after)
     
    I dunno about the not offered a permanent job. Maybe Apple wasn't his first choice, it isn't the end all be all. I'm sure he had tons of offers, Carnegie Mellon and all.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  26. Achilles says:

    you can find any study to justify any crazy notion

    If they really want to strike a blow for Social Justice, Sundar, Susan and their fellow Googlypuffs should gather up all of these studies into a big pile in front of the Googleplatz and burn them, in a giant cleansing “Säuberung.”

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  27. @Lot
    Lots of data about immigration and deportation under Trump:

    https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/8/10/16119910/trump-deportations-obama

    Good news: the numbers of illegals caught at the border has dropped by about 50% under Trump. That means fewer are trying. Trump's rhetoric, even though he has not followed through on most of it, has had a powerful deterrent effect. If half all illegals get apprehended at the border, this implies that the new illegal population will fall by about 140,000 in 2017.

    Bad news: the number of those already here getting deported each month has actually dropped under Trump. That is mostly because the easy deportations on the border have dropped so much.

    I've called some of the immigration proposals vaporware, especially the really stupid ones to increase the already very heavy federal penalties for illegal entry after deportation. The article points to two proposals that are realistic and would actually result in much larger numbers of deportations.

    The first is to increase the deportation infrastructure, specifically the number of prosecutors and the number of BIA judges. BIA appeals go to regular federal judges, so we'd need more of those too. Without doing this, showy ICE raids of illegals does nothing to increase deportations.

    Increasing the deportation infrastructure is something that could actually pass Congress. Indeed, there have been several moderate increases lately.

    But the most promising possibility is something Trump could do via executive-branch regulation:

    It would be much simpler, and much more efficient, to make it easier to deport people without court hearings — by expanding the process currently used for Mexican border-crossers to apply to other immigrants as well. That can be done by rewriting the regulations that determine who qualifies for “expedited removal.”

    Currently, immigrants caught within 100 miles of the border can be “expedited” out of the US unless they can prove that they’ve been in the US for at least two weeks. But the administration is allowed to expand that to cover immigrants caught anywhere in the country — and to force immigrants to prove two years of residence in the US to be allowed to stay.

    The executive orders signed by President Trump in January opened the door to such an expansion, but the Department of Homeland Security hasn’t announced any plans to change the regulations. It’s possible that DHS will only moderately expand the use of expedited removal. But it’s also possible that the Trump administration will get so fed up with the roadblock that immigration courts present to its deportation agenda that it will do everything it can to avoid the courts entirely.
     
    This is why Rick Perry at DHS would be a disaster. His record in Texas is not supporting the rule of law, but of giving illegals in-state tuition and calling Mitt Romney heartless for disagreeing with him.

    No Lot, the reason that there are less getting deported is because the Trump Admin isnt calling VRs “deportations”. Now that they’re cutting that out, you see a similar drop in apps that you do in faux deportations.

    10th Circuit is taking every 8 USC 1325 case that crosses its desk, as well as every 1326a1, b1, and b2 case. This was unthinkable in the Obama era.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  28. That explains it. The weak Indian puppet was surrounded by women and Jews, like Obama, none could think for themselves, but together they re-enforced one another’s twisted views and became a pack of hyenas. They could’ve easily issued a statement saying “What Damore expressed was his personal opinion, which he is entitled to as an individual. It does not represent any kind of consensus at Google nor does it represent the opinion of Google management.” And that would’ve been the end of it. Instead it’s now turned into a major imbroglio and is making the entire Google management look like the ass clowns that they are.

    Couldn’t have happened to a better company. These leftist hypocrite ass clowns got what they deserved.

    Read More
    • Replies: @MarcB.
    "Couldn’t have happened to a better company. These leftist hypocrite ass clowns got what they deserved".

    And they've shown it to the entire world. There will definitely be some people on the Good White side saying, "wait a minute, I don't think I heard/read that correctly." They've overplayed their hand, and this will result in a public relations disaster that will burn slowly for years.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  29. newrouter says:

    “Said one flatly: “He cannot spew his dubious biology arguments — you can find any study to justify any crazy notion — and not pay a price for it.””

    Spew climate nonsense you be Algore.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  30. Scottt says:

    Next time a female co-worker asks me to lift something heavy:
    ““While people may have a right to express their beliefs in public, that does not mean companies cannot take action when men are subjected to comments that perpetuate negative stereotypes about them based on their gender,” she wrote. “Every day, companies take action against employees who make unlawful statements about co-workers, or create hostile work environments.”

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  31. Interestingly, and importantly, Damore himself didn’t allow himself to get baited into a discussion of the biological implications of race:

    Damore’s treatise invited derision internally as well. At one point on Friday, on a thread titled “Why the focus on sex instead of race?,” a Google employee noted that “the paper is striking at a lot of people’s values. But I think it’s failing to bite an important bullet, failing to follow its ideas to their inevitable conclusion.” Then, in an apparent attempt to highlight the absurdity of Damore’s case, the employee asks, “Does the author think we should be more willing to consider essentialist explanations for the company’s racial makeup?”

    Damore, however, seems to have missed the question’s sardonic framing.

    Rather than dismiss race science out of hand, Damore responds that he doesn’t “know as much about racial issues” as he does about “gender ones.” He goes on to claim, “Also, women and men have repeatedly been shown to have biologically driven differences in population level distributions of traits so it’s much easier to understand some of the forces (and their solution) behind the gender gap.”

    Eventually, Damore takes offense as he catches on: “I’ve been told by multiple people that you’re trying to bait me into saying something to get me fired and that you’ve done it before. This is perhaps the least Googley thing I’ve heard anyone do, please stop.”

    https://www.wired.com/story/internal-messages-james-damore-google-memo?mbid=social_twitter

    Damore’s approach is going to make it a lot harder for people to nail him and disappear him.

    Read More
    • Replies: @candid_observer
    It's plausible enough that someone with a training in biology would find the case for biologically based differences between men and women to be more convincing.

    Sexual dimorphism is the default assumption across mammals, and in primates in particular. Such things as different preferences and behavior are pretty much universal across mammalian species.

    Arguments that different races are, based on biology, different in cognitive ability must be based on less direct evidence, even if that evidence is, for the properly initiated, in fact even more powerful.

    Not every species has various subspecies which display obviously different cognitive abilities.

    , @Dave Pinsen
    Bloomberg's Emily Chang brought up the "what if the memo was about race?" argument in her interview with Damore. Damore could have handled this one a bit better, but I guess this was his first non-friendly interview after the Molyneaux and Peterson ones.

    https://twitter.com/dpinsen/status/895857802173968384
    , @res
    The top rated comment on that Wired article had a link to an interesting Bloomberg article from a few weeks ago:
    Deloitte Thinks Diversity Groups Are Passé
    https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-07-19/deloitte-thinks-diversity-groups-are-pass

    The firm is nixing employee affinity groups for women and minorities—fixtures at many large companies—and replacing them with inclusion councils that have white men.
     
    A follow up article: https://www.cebglobal.com/talentdaily/will-deloittes-new-di-strategy-increase-participation-from-allies/

    Has anyone here seen the Harvard Business Review diversity and inclusion special issue from July-August 2016? Any comments?
    https://www.cebglobal.com/talentdaily/the-harvard-diversity-review/
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  32. at some point, if we really want to change, we have

    $600B of market cap to burn through. Best get started!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  33. @Lot
    Lots of data about immigration and deportation under Trump:

    https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/8/10/16119910/trump-deportations-obama

    Good news: the numbers of illegals caught at the border has dropped by about 50% under Trump. That means fewer are trying. Trump's rhetoric, even though he has not followed through on most of it, has had a powerful deterrent effect. If half all illegals get apprehended at the border, this implies that the new illegal population will fall by about 140,000 in 2017.

    Bad news: the number of those already here getting deported each month has actually dropped under Trump. That is mostly because the easy deportations on the border have dropped so much.

    I've called some of the immigration proposals vaporware, especially the really stupid ones to increase the already very heavy federal penalties for illegal entry after deportation. The article points to two proposals that are realistic and would actually result in much larger numbers of deportations.

    The first is to increase the deportation infrastructure, specifically the number of prosecutors and the number of BIA judges. BIA appeals go to regular federal judges, so we'd need more of those too. Without doing this, showy ICE raids of illegals does nothing to increase deportations.

    Increasing the deportation infrastructure is something that could actually pass Congress. Indeed, there have been several moderate increases lately.

    But the most promising possibility is something Trump could do via executive-branch regulation:

    It would be much simpler, and much more efficient, to make it easier to deport people without court hearings — by expanding the process currently used for Mexican border-crossers to apply to other immigrants as well. That can be done by rewriting the regulations that determine who qualifies for “expedited removal.”

    Currently, immigrants caught within 100 miles of the border can be “expedited” out of the US unless they can prove that they’ve been in the US for at least two weeks. But the administration is allowed to expand that to cover immigrants caught anywhere in the country — and to force immigrants to prove two years of residence in the US to be allowed to stay.

    The executive orders signed by President Trump in January opened the door to such an expansion, but the Department of Homeland Security hasn’t announced any plans to change the regulations. It’s possible that DHS will only moderately expand the use of expedited removal. But it’s also possible that the Trump administration will get so fed up with the roadblock that immigration courts present to its deportation agenda that it will do everything it can to avoid the courts entirely.
     
    This is why Rick Perry at DHS would be a disaster. His record in Texas is not supporting the rule of law, but of giving illegals in-state tuition and calling Mitt Romney heartless for disagreeing with him.

    As I suggest everywhere this topic comes up: prosecute large-scale employers of illegal aliens under the RICO act. An orchard industry that relies on illegal labour almost certainly dabbles in immigration fraud: one of the specific crimes mentioned in the act. An industry that systemically from top to bottom relies on crime to operate, that could not continue with its current practices without criminal activity, is precisely what a “corrupt organization” *is*.

    Start throwing the bosses of large, billion-dollar agricultural corporations in prison for racketeering. Oh, and have the local cops start going after people who hire illegal alien household servants, fry cooks, etc.

    You don’t need new laws: you just need to start enforcing the laws you already have, with the goal that people will start – you know – obeying them. What a shame the USA has mostly destroyed its unions. A few teamsters fighting for their jobs would sort out the illegals.

    Read More
    • Agree: Jim Don Bob
    • Replies: @Bill
    Hey, that's my shtick. We'll know that we have an anti-illegal-immigration administration when the first C-suite guy goes to federal prison for a long time. And, by the way, if the RICO is giving campaign contributions to some Congressmen, isn't that cause for some kind of extensive investigation of such Congressmen?
    , @MBlanc46
    Absolutely, and not not just the ag biz. Start throwing the board members and c-suite occupiers into the slammer, not just the poor mopes in HR who actually sign the paper.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  34. women are subjected to comments that perpetuate negative stereotypes about them based on their gender

    The proposed harm here is hypothetical.

    The harm visited by prohibiting such comments (and the facts they contain) is actual and provable harm against men.

    Gentlemen, it is time to take the offensive together.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  35. @Jack D

    “I think the problem and also benefit of Google has been that we’ve created and encouraged an environment where everyone thinks they can say what they want, because that is what has always been the way it has been,” said another top exec. “But, at some point, if we really want to change, we have to think harder about what impact that has, especially when it makes women or others feel unsafe in the environment we have created.”
     
    This is the money quote. This was not just canning some nobody. It was crossing the Rubicon, the turning point from which there is no going back. Before this week, Google was an organization where the most important value was speaking the truth, getting stuff done. But now it is just another libtard nursery where the most important value is to create a "safe space" for their infantile charges. This is the day that marks the beginning of the end at Google.

    Yes — ‘. . . if we really want to change . . .’ is the turning point.

    This is a clear signal that Google’s senior management has committed to bog-variety leftist utopia-building as their core mission.

    It’s in notable contrast to their detached, negatively-stated original ‘Don’t be evil’ mantra.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Desiderius
    That and/or the therapeutic model.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  36. @Dave Pinsen

    Steve Jobs was panicked at the lack of black engineers at Apple.
     
    Was he? I know of a black Carnegie Mellon CS alumnus who worked as an intern at Apple (and, presumably, wasn't offered a permanent job, because he didn't work there after). He was there when Steve Jobs was alive (he blogged about sitting behind Jobs during a cafeteria conversation).

    Steve quickly asked, “Do you have an engineering program?”
    “We have a dual engineering program with universities such as Georgia Tech and Michigan,” I told him.
    “Can you help us hire black engineers?” he said. “Do you know how many black engineers we have?”
    Before I could say anything he shared a shockingly low number and confessed how poorly Apple was doing in finding black candidates. I’ll skip the full exchange, but suffice it to say, I got an intimate peek into Steve’s passion and energy. He was seriously upset at Apple’s efforts in that area. His last words to me that day were, “If you have any ideas on how we can hire more black engineers, send me an email.”

    source:

    https://urbanfaith.com/2011/10/steve-jobs-passion-for-diversity.html/

    Clearly it was not lack of trying.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  37. @Jack D

    “I think the problem and also benefit of Google has been that we’ve created and encouraged an environment where everyone thinks they can say what they want, because that is what has always been the way it has been,” said another top exec. “But, at some point, if we really want to change, we have to think harder about what impact that has, especially when it makes women or others feel unsafe in the environment we have created.”
     
    This is the money quote. This was not just canning some nobody. It was crossing the Rubicon, the turning point from which there is no going back. Before this week, Google was an organization where the most important value was speaking the truth, getting stuff done. But now it is just another libtard nursery where the most important value is to create a "safe space" for their infantile charges. This is the day that marks the beginning of the end at Google.

    Google was an organization where the most important value was speaking the truth

    Notice when they talk about free speech (i.e. free thought) now they don’t say,”speaking the truth,” they say, “saying what you want.” Always moving goalposts.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  38. @The Last Real Calvinist
    Yes -- '. . . if we really want to change . . .' is the turning point.

    This is a clear signal that Google's senior management has committed to bog-variety leftist utopia-building as their core mission.

    It's in notable contrast to their detached, negatively-stated original 'Don't be evil' mantra.

    That and/or the therapeutic model.

    Read More
    • Replies: @The Last Real Calvinist

    That and/or the therapeutic model.

     

    'and', I think: isn't the therapeutic model the individualist microcosm of the utopian macrocosm?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  39. eah says:

    Plenty of potential upside here dudes — click here to see why — and wait til he gets that Google settlement cash.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  40. Anon says: • Disclaimer

    Damore’s memo was descriptive, not prescriptive.

    He wasn’t saying ‘It should be this way’. He was saying ‘Why is it this way?’

    And his memo tried to explain the current reality at Google and other high-tech companies where men dominate.

    Since Brin and Page created a company where men dominate, it is they who should be canned. All Damore did was notice the reality and try to explain why.

    Btw, I don’t see how feminism is morally feasible. When women take jobs from men, it means men cannot get married and have families. Women without jobs can marry. Men without jobs cannot.
    When women lose jobs, they can still have families. When men lose jobs, they also lose families. Loss is greater. Since humans are primarily organisms, their main function is to sustain life and meaning. And that comes through family. So, denying men the right to family is a violation of organicist law.

    So, women moving into workforce is a great violence on men.

    Feminism will destroy the West, and in the end, non-feminist civilizations will survive and take over.
    East Asia, part of the world that imitates the West the most, is also dying cuz it goes against organicist law.

    While women should be allowed to work, men must be prioritized given the differences in sexual dynamics. True meaning comes from family. For women, loss of jobs can still mean having a family. For men, loss of jobs means losing family as well. That is beyond cruel. It is inhuman and anti-life.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Rod1963
    All true.

    There is no doubt West will eventually be wiped out by non feminist cultures. The upper and professional classes have no fight left in them and are dying out. More than likely you'll find the more highly educated whites welcoming these foreign invaders. The only ones who have some fight left are the lower classes who provide the workers and soldiers for country. Problem is they are universally detested by the white upper classes who want them eradicated forthwith.

    In regards to feminism, it's a well known fact, that college educated women don't marry or have many children. The thing is women being very social conscious will not marry a less educated man or if they do it won't last long because she had contempt for such a mate. Men OTOH have no problem marrying a less educated woman from a lower class.

    The other problem with college is that it saddles the woman with a six figure debt right the gate. And college is where most of the Marxist and feminism indoctrination takes place. At one this was the domain of cults like Hare Krishna and the Bagwhan - mind f**king kids into tools. Now days it's the job of tenured professors at Ivies that do it.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  41. eah says:

    He’s ‘tweeting’ now.

    Read More
    • Replies: @eah
    He's piling up followers at a record pace -- "LOL" -- #BestCareerMoveEver
    , @Dave Pinsen
    That's great work by the photographer.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  42. @Desiderius
    That and/or the therapeutic model.

    That and/or the therapeutic model.

    ‘and’, I think: isn’t the therapeutic model the individualist microcosm of the utopian macrocosm?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  43. Alden says:
    @TelfoedJohn

    Pichai wrote to employees on Monday and said as much, but much more politely: “To suggest a group of our colleagues have traits that make them less biologically suited to that work is offensive and not OK.”
     
    I can't hear the last sentence in anything but a female voice. Has a man ever said "offensive and not OK"?

    liberal progressive men say things like offensive, not ok and my favorite, ” that’s scary” all the time.

    Liberal men aren’t gay, but neither are they real men. We need a new word for liberal White men. How about race traitor?

    Read More
    • Replies: @TelfoedJohn
    I find it very hard to believe. Show me a video of a man saying "that's offensive and not ok" or "that's scary". RuPaul doesn't count.
    , @Samuel Skinner
    Shitlib works better.
    , @Roderick Spode
    that's two words
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  44. @candid_observer
    Interestingly, and importantly, Damore himself didn't allow himself to get baited into a discussion of the biological implications of race:

    Damore's treatise invited derision internally as well. At one point on Friday, on a thread titled "Why the focus on sex instead of race?," a Google employee noted that "the paper is striking at a lot of people’s values. But I think it’s failing to bite an important bullet, failing to follow its ideas to their inevitable conclusion." Then, in an apparent attempt to highlight the absurdity of Damore's case, the employee asks, "Does the author think we should be more willing to consider essentialist explanations for the company’s racial makeup?"

    Damore, however, seems to have missed the question's sardonic framing.

    Rather than dismiss race science out of hand, Damore responds that he doesn't "know as much about racial issues" as he does about "gender ones." He goes on to claim, "Also, women and men have repeatedly been shown to have biologically driven differences in population level distributions of traits so it’s much easier to understand some of the forces (and their solution) behind the gender gap."

    Eventually, Damore takes offense as he catches on: "I’ve been told by multiple people that you’re trying to bait me into saying something to get me fired and that you’ve done it before. This is perhaps the least Googley thing I’ve heard anyone do, please stop.”
     

    https://www.wired.com/story/internal-messages-james-damore-google-memo?mbid=social_twitter

    Damore's approach is going to make it a lot harder for people to nail him and disappear him.

    It’s plausible enough that someone with a training in biology would find the case for biologically based differences between men and women to be more convincing.

    Sexual dimorphism is the default assumption across mammals, and in primates in particular. Such things as different preferences and behavior are pretty much universal across mammalian species.

    Arguments that different races are, based on biology, different in cognitive ability must be based on less direct evidence, even if that evidence is, for the properly initiated, in fact even more powerful.

    Not every species has various subspecies which display obviously different cognitive abilities.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    What is the starting point book to read on whether there are cognitive and behavioral differences between races?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  45. Alden says:

    I wonder why he wrote the memo? Was he in some sort of diversity committe charged with hiring and promoting more women and minorities? Does he have to work with incompetent women and do their work?

    Maybe he’s retirement age and wants to go out with a bang.

    Read More
    • Replies: @JW
    It wasn't retirement, he missed the 4 year vesting mark by 3 months.
    , @res
    If you listen to the interviews he was recently involved in some diversity summits. He was calling attention to what he saw as borderline illegal activities in Google's hiring process. See this excerpt from his memo:

    The harm of Google’s biases
    I strongly believe in gender and racial diversity, and I think we should strive for more. However, to achieve a more equal gender and race representation, Google has created several discriminatory practices:
    ● Programs, mentoring, and classes only for people with a certain gender or race5
    ● A high priority queue and special treatment for “diversity” candidates
    ● Hiring practices which can effectively lower the bar for “diversity” candidates by decreasing the false negative rate
    ● Reconsidering any set of people if it’s not “diverse” enough, but not showing that same scrutiny in the reverse direction (clear confirmation bias)
    ● Setting org level OKRs for increased representation which can incentivize illegal discrimination6

     

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  46. eah says:

    I can’t imagine why.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  47. Dave Pinsen says: • Website
    @candid_observer
    Interestingly, and importantly, Damore himself didn't allow himself to get baited into a discussion of the biological implications of race:

    Damore's treatise invited derision internally as well. At one point on Friday, on a thread titled "Why the focus on sex instead of race?," a Google employee noted that "the paper is striking at a lot of people’s values. But I think it’s failing to bite an important bullet, failing to follow its ideas to their inevitable conclusion." Then, in an apparent attempt to highlight the absurdity of Damore's case, the employee asks, "Does the author think we should be more willing to consider essentialist explanations for the company’s racial makeup?"

    Damore, however, seems to have missed the question's sardonic framing.

    Rather than dismiss race science out of hand, Damore responds that he doesn't "know as much about racial issues" as he does about "gender ones." He goes on to claim, "Also, women and men have repeatedly been shown to have biologically driven differences in population level distributions of traits so it’s much easier to understand some of the forces (and their solution) behind the gender gap."

    Eventually, Damore takes offense as he catches on: "I’ve been told by multiple people that you’re trying to bait me into saying something to get me fired and that you’ve done it before. This is perhaps the least Googley thing I’ve heard anyone do, please stop.”
     

    https://www.wired.com/story/internal-messages-james-damore-google-memo?mbid=social_twitter

    Damore's approach is going to make it a lot harder for people to nail him and disappear him.

    Bloomberg’s Emily Chang brought up the “what if the memo was about race?” argument in her interview with Damore. Damore could have handled this one a bit better, but I guess this was his first non-friendly interview after the Molyneaux and Peterson ones.

    Read More
    • Replies: @eah
    Damore could have handled this one a bit better

    He should have just said 'If it had been about race (instead of gender) it would have been similarly supported by facts and so I would defend it in the same way: #Fired4Truth'.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  48. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @candid_observer
    It's plausible enough that someone with a training in biology would find the case for biologically based differences between men and women to be more convincing.

    Sexual dimorphism is the default assumption across mammals, and in primates in particular. Such things as different preferences and behavior are pretty much universal across mammalian species.

    Arguments that different races are, based on biology, different in cognitive ability must be based on less direct evidence, even if that evidence is, for the properly initiated, in fact even more powerful.

    Not every species has various subspecies which display obviously different cognitive abilities.

    What is the starting point book to read on whether there are cognitive and behavioral differences between races?

    Read More
    • Replies: @candid_observer
    I'd have to say The Bell Curve is the most accessible book that deals with the issue of IQ and race in particular, even though it confines its discussion of that issue to one chapter, and doesn't draw a strong conclusion.
    , @epebble
    This is the text book:

    https://www.amazon.com/Bell-Curve-Intelligence-Structure-Paperbacks/dp/0684824299
    , @ben tillman

    What is the starting point book to read on whether there are cognitive and behavioral differences between races?
     
    There's no need to read books, as it's all plainly observable.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  49. @JerryC

    Said one flatly: “He cannot spew his dubious biology arguments — you can find any study to justify any crazy notion — and not pay a price for it.”
     
    Love this. Men and women being different is now just some crazy notion that nutjobs believe in, like the History Channel alien guy with the crazy hair. We are truly living in bizarro world now.

    Typical. I brought up race/IQ data and the others went wild. 1. They thought this was my idea 2. Called it wild and far-fetched 3. Accused me of making up the numbers.

    It occurred to me that the others in the discussion (mainly Millenials) have never heard of this and/or think it is all crazy fantasy stuff.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  50. Sorry if this has been noted in one of the many ISteve posts of the last day or so, none of which I’ve read in detail, but i had an epiphany which is embarrassingly obvious in retrospect.[Edit: I see others pointing it out here]

    With regard to the this-made-our-decision quote by the female CEO, “what if he’d said these things about blacks or hispanics?” I admit that it was a bit of a gotcha for me at first. Like, how would you rebut that in casual conversation around blacks or hispanics without the pointing out that it would still be every bit as true.

    But, i was just thinking to myself just now that, well, he didn’t actually say it about blacks or hispanics, so .. so what? Then it hit me. What if his point had been that woman are more suited to breast feeding than men? And their retort was “what if he said that about blacks or hispanics?” You’d scrunch your face and say “huh?”. The biological differences between men and women are so obviously of a completely different type, or category, that that between whites and blacks/hispanics. One is called gender and it’s related to having completely different types of chromosomes, and its evolutionary history is on the order of billions of years. The other is called race and it’s a nebulous difference in family history going back on the order of 100K years.

    It’s such a softball that it didn’t need the Lebron analogy.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anon
    its evolutionary history is on the order of billions of years

    FYI, Life is 4 billion years old; cellular life is a billion years old.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_of_sexual_reproduction#Origin_of_sexual_reproduction
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  51. jon says:

    what if we replaced the word ‘women’ in the memo with another group? What if the memo said that biological differences amongst Black, Hispanic, or LGBTQ employees explained their underrepresentation in tech and leadership roles?

    Wait, can just any old group use this argument. Can we substitute black, hispanic, or lgbtq for anyone as a test of whether it is acceptable? I’m doubtful.

    Read More
    • Replies: @JW
    Analogies are not a form of reasoning and cannot be used as part of a logical argument.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  52. jon says:
    @EriK
    YouTube loses money hand over fist.

    YouTube loses money hand over fist.

    They pretty much all do, but they are still billionaires.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  53. eah says:
    @eah
    He's 'tweeting' now.

    https://twitter.com/Fired4Truth/status/895731392595742720

    He’s piling up followers at a record pace — “LOL” — #BestCareerMoveEver

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  54. JW says:
    @Jack D

    “I think the problem and also benefit of Google has been that we’ve created and encouraged an environment where everyone thinks they can say what they want, because that is what has always been the way it has been,” said another top exec. “But, at some point, if we really want to change, we have to think harder about what impact that has, especially when it makes women or others feel unsafe in the environment we have created.”
     
    This is the money quote. This was not just canning some nobody. It was crossing the Rubicon, the turning point from which there is no going back. Before this week, Google was an organization where the most important value was speaking the truth, getting stuff done. But now it is just another libtard nursery where the most important value is to create a "safe space" for their infantile charges. This is the day that marks the beginning of the end at Google.

    There’s much ruin in a company. Google has several monopolies, it’s not clear market forces can dethrone them. Intel has been going down Google’s path for years and years. Google’s VP of diversity came from Intel.

    Read More
    • Agree: PV van der Byl
    • Replies: @PV van der Byl
    Charlie Munger, Berkshire Hathaway Vice-Chairman, has said that Google has the deepest "moat" in the world.
    , @Jack D
    I don't disagree, but still I think this means that they are at or near their high water mark and the decline begins now. It might take 10 or 20 or 30 years to empty the vast reservoir but once the dam has been breached the outcome is inevitable. How many future Damores will interview elsewhere? How many dead weight SJW's will seek to take his place? How long until some users start to notice the difference? At Mizzou the impact was felt in a matter of months.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  55. wren says:

    I always thought it was started in her garage, and she was their landlord.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  56. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    All kidding aside … Is CEO Susan Wojcicki behind the de-monetization of MAGA people on YouTube?

    Since she appears to be the top SJW headhunter at Google/Alphabet (as per the Damore affair) it stands to reason that she has personally directed the defunding of YouTube sites by Milo, Cernovich, Infowars, etc and even those two black ladies from the Trump campaign!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  57. @Dave Pinsen

    Steve Jobs was panicked at the lack of black engineers at Apple.
     
    Was he? I know of a black Carnegie Mellon CS alumnus who worked as an intern at Apple (and, presumably, wasn't offered a permanent job, because he didn't work there after). He was there when Steve Jobs was alive (he blogged about sitting behind Jobs during a cafeteria conversation).

    Perhaps – and this seem pretty common among titans of today – it was a matter of Jobs being publicly panicked at the lack of Apple duskiness. Privately – and so honestly – perhaps he really didn’t give a damn. He was a major component putting computers in every home in the world. I find it easy to believe the travails of chronic whiners left him cold.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  58. @Alden
    liberal progressive men say things like offensive, not ok and my favorite, " that's scary" all the time.

    Liberal men aren't gay, but neither are they real men. We need a new word for liberal White men. How about race traitor?

    I find it very hard to believe. Show me a video of a man saying “that’s offensive and not ok” or “that’s scary”. RuPaul doesn’t count.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  59. @Anonymous
    What is the starting point book to read on whether there are cognitive and behavioral differences between races?

    I’d have to say The Bell Curve is the most accessible book that deals with the issue of IQ and race in particular, even though it confines its discussion of that issue to one chapter, and doesn’t draw a strong conclusion.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  60. anonguy says:
    @Daniel Chieh
    Women take everything too personally.

    Women take everything too personally.

    A more value-neutral and objective way of making your assertion would be women have a tendency to take things more personally than do men.

    Whether this is good or not is removed from the statement. You obviously think it is bad, while whoever designed women must have thought it good, if it is indeed true as you assert.

    That leads to two questions:

    1) Upon what do you base your claim that women take things more personally than men?

    2) Why is this bad? If it were bad, why would it be a pervasive trait of females assuming it does actually exist.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh
    Peter Frost in Evo and Proud studied this among others: essentially, "hysterical behavior" is pretty useful as a survival method to get more attention, and thus, more food when things are desperate. Its an useful measure, as selfish genetics go, but not for the tribe or group.

    Plenty of studies show that women generally affiliate tribe oddly, they tend to consider other women to be their in-group more than anything else. Men do not affiliate by sex at all.
    , @Bill

    1) Upon what do you base your claim that women take things more personally than men?

    2) Why is this bad?
     
    This is an excellent example of why scientism is so toxic. Any idea can be protected via the endless deployment of strategic nihilism and the is/ought dichotomy. "I refute Berkeley thus" is a sensible answer to questions like this.
    , @whoever
    I'd add that many men take things too personally, as well. You can see it every day in comment sections, where disagreements over the most trivial foolishness become snarling, insult-laden contests of will and quests for social dominance.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  61. JW says:
    @Alden
    I wonder why he wrote the memo? Was he in some sort of diversity committe charged with hiring and promoting more women and minorities? Does he have to work with incompetent women and do their work?

    Maybe he's retirement age and wants to go out with a bang.

    It wasn’t retirement, he missed the 4 year vesting mark by 3 months.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  62. anonguy says:
    @Dave Pinsen

    Steve Jobs was panicked at the lack of black engineers at Apple.
     
    Was he? I know of a black Carnegie Mellon CS alumnus who worked as an intern at Apple (and, presumably, wasn't offered a permanent job, because he didn't work there after). He was there when Steve Jobs was alive (he blogged about sitting behind Jobs during a cafeteria conversation).

    I know of a black Carnegie Mellon CS alumnus who worked as an intern at Apple (and, presumably, wasn’t offered a permanent job, because he didn’t work there after)

    I dunno about the not offered a permanent job. Maybe Apple wasn’t his first choice, it isn’t the end all be all. I’m sure he had tons of offers, Carnegie Mellon and all.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dave Pinsen
    If he did, he didn't take any. When he wrote that, he was running his own business out of New Jersey selling t-shirts to tech startups and doing some web development.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  63. Moshe says:

    Uh, can I point out that there’s something dishonest about the bunch’a’ya anti-(((neocons))) who talked and talked and talked about the insanity of war and yet this isn’t the subject of 7 stories and 5,000 comments?

    It started yesterday.

    Fire and fury the likes of which the world has never seen before.

    Read More
    • Replies: @San Fernando Curt
    Try not to wet your panties. Trump's gambit puts pressure on China to rein in it's annoying little client to the South. North Korea is a chihuahua - bark big, bite lite. Since any hot war would explode on China's patio, NK will be frozen out - if something happens to us, China's economy will go 1929; we're it's biggest loan sucker. I'm glad the ers of suck-up foreign policy is over. For lack of a better term, revolution will do.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  64. @JerryC

    Said one flatly: “He cannot spew his dubious biology arguments — you can find any study to justify any crazy notion — and not pay a price for it.”
     
    Love this. Men and women being different is now just some crazy notion that nutjobs believe in, like the History Channel alien guy with the crazy hair. We are truly living in bizarro world now.

    Whoa! The Hedge Head? He’s the best! Well… boom!… I’m triggered!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  65. epebble says:
    @Anonymous
    What is the starting point book to read on whether there are cognitive and behavioral differences between races?
    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  66. JW says:
    @jon

    what if we replaced the word ‘women’ in the memo with another group? What if the memo said that biological differences amongst Black, Hispanic, or LGBTQ employees explained their underrepresentation in tech and leadership roles?
     
    Wait, can just any old group use this argument. Can we substitute black, hispanic, or lgbtq for anyone as a test of whether it is acceptable? I'm doubtful.

    Analogies are not a form of reasoning and cannot be used as part of a logical argument.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  67. anon says: • Disclaimer
    @JeremiahJohnbalaya
    Sorry if this has been noted in one of the many ISteve posts of the last day or so, none of which I've read in detail, but i had an epiphany which is embarrassingly obvious in retrospect.[Edit: I see others pointing it out here]

    With regard to the this-made-our-decision quote by the female CEO, "what if he'd said these things about blacks or hispanics?" I admit that it was a bit of a gotcha for me at first. Like, how would you rebut that in casual conversation around blacks or hispanics without the pointing out that it would still be every bit as true.

    But, i was just thinking to myself just now that, well, he didn't actually say it about blacks or hispanics, so .. so what? Then it hit me. What if his point had been that woman are more suited to breast feeding than men? And their retort was "what if he said that about blacks or hispanics?" You'd scrunch your face and say "huh?". The biological differences between men and women are so obviously of a completely different type, or category, that that between whites and blacks/hispanics. One is called gender and it's related to having completely different types of chromosomes, and its evolutionary history is on the order of billions of years. The other is called race and it's a nebulous difference in family history going back on the order of 100K years.

    It's such a softball that it didn't need the Lebron analogy.

    its evolutionary history is on the order of billions of years

    FYI, Life is 4 billion years old; cellular life is a billion years old.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_of_sexual_reproduction#Origin_of_sexual_reproduction

    Read More
    • Replies: @JeremiahJohnbalaya
    Go FYI yourself b/c "sexual reproduction first appeared by 1.2 billion years ago"

    (whoops. "order of a billion years", not "billions". Lucky for me, "order of" gives you a leeway of almost a factor of 10 in either direction)

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  68. @TelfoedJohn

    Pichai wrote to employees on Monday and said as much, but much more politely: “To suggest a group of our colleagues have traits that make them less biologically suited to that work is offensive and not OK.”
     
    I can't hear the last sentence in anything but a female voice. Has a man ever said "offensive and not OK"?

    I imagine Pichai talking to Damore sounds something like this…

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  69. @anon
    its evolutionary history is on the order of billions of years

    FYI, Life is 4 billion years old; cellular life is a billion years old.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_of_sexual_reproduction#Origin_of_sexual_reproduction

    Go FYI yourself b/c “sexual reproduction first appeared by 1.2 billion years ago”

    (whoops. “order of a billion years”, not “billions”. Lucky for me, “order of” gives you a leeway of almost a factor of 10 in either direction)

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  70. Rod1963 says:
    @Anon
    Damore's memo was descriptive, not prescriptive.

    He wasn't saying 'It should be this way'. He was saying 'Why is it this way?'

    And his memo tried to explain the current reality at Google and other high-tech companies where men dominate.

    Since Brin and Page created a company where men dominate, it is they who should be canned. All Damore did was notice the reality and try to explain why.

    Btw, I don't see how feminism is morally feasible. When women take jobs from men, it means men cannot get married and have families. Women without jobs can marry. Men without jobs cannot.
    When women lose jobs, they can still have families. When men lose jobs, they also lose families. Loss is greater. Since humans are primarily organisms, their main function is to sustain life and meaning. And that comes through family. So, denying men the right to family is a violation of organicist law.

    So, women moving into workforce is a great violence on men.

    Feminism will destroy the West, and in the end, non-feminist civilizations will survive and take over.
    East Asia, part of the world that imitates the West the most, is also dying cuz it goes against organicist law.

    While women should be allowed to work, men must be prioritized given the differences in sexual dynamics. True meaning comes from family. For women, loss of jobs can still mean having a family. For men, loss of jobs means losing family as well. That is beyond cruel. It is inhuman and anti-life.

    All true.

    There is no doubt West will eventually be wiped out by non feminist cultures. The upper and professional classes have no fight left in them and are dying out. More than likely you’ll find the more highly educated whites welcoming these foreign invaders. The only ones who have some fight left are the lower classes who provide the workers and soldiers for country. Problem is they are universally detested by the white upper classes who want them eradicated forthwith.

    In regards to feminism, it’s a well known fact, that college educated women don’t marry or have many children. The thing is women being very social conscious will not marry a less educated man or if they do it won’t last long because she had contempt for such a mate. Men OTOH have no problem marrying a less educated woman from a lower class.

    The other problem with college is that it saddles the woman with a six figure debt right the gate. And college is where most of the Marxist and feminism indoctrination takes place. At one this was the domain of cults like Hare Krishna and the Bagwhan – mind f**king kids into tools. Now days it’s the job of tenured professors at Ivies that do it.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  71. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    Where’s the relief thread on Taylor Swift’s ASS!?

    Let’s do a dissertation on the unbelievable firm young female ass that is now on public display–streetwalker style–on American sidewalks coast to coast… (social trend imported from late stage democracies in Euro-Med zone) and how this situation dovetails with the TS grabass courtroom drama.

    What cannot be denied is that average American girls are putting their asses in our faces like never before, and simultaneously the professional showbiz bootyshakers asses are not allowed to be touched.

    Q: Would TS drag Tom Brady into court for grabbing her ass? How about David Beckham? DiCaprio?

    It’s clear: the flyover country DJ didn’t have high enough alpha male status to get away with that epic TS assgrab. The entire kerfuffle is a matter of status. Brad Pitt could’ve grabbed her ass ALL DAY LONG and received strong approval from both Taylor and her mother.

    PS Elon Musk could have also gotten away with this horrible “crime”, because mega $$$ = super alpha status. And when super alphas attack, the smart pretty girls lay back and enjoy it. And they aren’t faking the orgasm!

    Read More
    • Replies: @Father O'Hara
    He didn't do it IMHO.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  72. @Alden
    liberal progressive men say things like offensive, not ok and my favorite, " that's scary" all the time.

    Liberal men aren't gay, but neither are they real men. We need a new word for liberal White men. How about race traitor?

    Shitlib works better.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  73. DFH says:
    @TelfoedJohn

    Pichai wrote to employees on Monday and said as much, but much more politely: “To suggest a group of our colleagues have traits that make them less biologically suited to that work is offensive and not OK.”
     
    I can't hear the last sentence in anything but a female voice. Has a man ever said "offensive and not OK"?

    Women love these words because ‘not OK’ refers to the violation of social norms (rather than what’s actually true).

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  74. @Alden
    liberal progressive men say things like offensive, not ok and my favorite, " that's scary" all the time.

    Liberal men aren't gay, but neither are they real men. We need a new word for liberal White men. How about race traitor?

    that’s two words

    Read More
    • Replies: @kaganovitch
    In the original German it's "Rassenverrater", so one word.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  75. Dave Pinsen says: • Website
    @Anonymous
    Will someone tell me why I'm wrong to see a common theme w/r/t Jewish-run institutions like Google acting with a strong authoritarian hand against diversity heretics and other Jewish-run/derived systems like communism and Christianity's similar stifling of wrongthink/heresy, not to mention the comparable characteristics that are present among Arabs/within Islam? It seems to me that this type of authoritarian way of running the show, pushing non-reality-based ideologies on others, and then punishing dissenters is behavior that is perhaps more prevalent in Semites than others, no?

    Google is run by an Indian-American, Sundar Pichai. The executive chairman of its parent company, Alphabet, is a German-American gentile named Eric Schmidt. The two Jewish co-founders serve below him as president and CEO, respectively.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Lurker
    But who really gives the orders? The two guys who founded the company and retain a controlling interest or the German figurehead and the diversity window dressing?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  76. Dave Pinsen says: • Website
    @eah
    He's 'tweeting' now.

    https://twitter.com/Fired4Truth/status/895731392595742720

    That’s great work by the photographer.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  77. Dave Pinsen says: • Website
    @anonguy

    I know of a black Carnegie Mellon CS alumnus who worked as an intern at Apple (and, presumably, wasn’t offered a permanent job, because he didn’t work there after)
     
    I dunno about the not offered a permanent job. Maybe Apple wasn't his first choice, it isn't the end all be all. I'm sure he had tons of offers, Carnegie Mellon and all.

    If he did, he didn’t take any. When he wrote that, he was running his own business out of New Jersey selling t-shirts to tech startups and doing some web development.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anonguy
    I don't doubt you at all, just seems incredible to me that any CS grad of CMU wouldn't have multiple job offers regardless of his race.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  78. Dave Pinsen says: • Website

    Paul Graham is subtweeting about the James Damore affair.

    He also tweeted a link to this post by Scott Aaronson which is obviously inspired by James Damore getting fired but doesn’t mention it at all and Scott warns he’ll delete comments related to it.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Paco Wové
    Questioning the Ptolemaic model is hurtful and NOT OK
    , @res
    That is an interesting and highly relevant post by Scott Aaronson. I was intrigued by the particular way in which he chose to censor this comment (e.g. not just flushing it):

    wolfgang Says:
    Comment #25 August 9th, 2017 at 6:38 am
    Scott,

    you just wrote a long and interesting blog post about Kolmogorov, just to not comment on this [REDACTED]

    Why are you so afraid of just telling us the truth – which is that the whole world has gone nuts and there is nothing anyone can do about it.
     
    I liked this comment (too long to include) relating things to McCarthyism: http://www.scottaaronson.com/blog/?p=3376#comment-1741493

    The Scott-Liz dialog (comments 101-106) is interesting. I wonder if Liz would have been baying for blood if Scott had been more explicit.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  79. anonguy says:
    @Dave Pinsen
    If he did, he didn't take any. When he wrote that, he was running his own business out of New Jersey selling t-shirts to tech startups and doing some web development.

    I don’t doubt you at all, just seems incredible to me that any CS grad of CMU wouldn’t have multiple job offers regardless of his race.

    Read More
    • Replies: @TomSchmidt
    Wanna bet?

    http://www.latimes.com/business/hiltzik/la-fi-mh-the-scandal-of-engineering-visas-20160226-column.html

    Granted, a CMU grad might have a lower chance of not securing employment. All the ones I've met have been brilliant. But perhaps not the best at talking themselves into jobs, being almost painfully shy.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  80. This looks like an interesting summary of the relevant research.

    Surprisingly readable. The red/blue color scheme is very helpful.

    https://heterodoxacademy.org/2017/08/10/the-google-memo-what-does-the-research-say-about-gender-differences/

    Read More
    • Replies: @res
    Thanks! That has an excellent collection of references and useful summaries for each. One issue is that I think the "summaries" are the abstracts and in my experience abstracts tend to be weighted to emphasize the more Narrative affirming conclusions (here that sex differences are minimal and decreasing over time as society becomes more equal).

    I do think the authors have some bias against the existence of sex differences. For example, consider these two statements considered positive and negative respectively:

    Results showed that sex differences are significant in several tests but that some intertest differences exist.
     

    Partial support was found for the notion that the magnitude of sex differences has decreased in recent years.
     
    I think the strength of these two statements differs. Particularly interesting is that when I dig into the body of the paper I find:

    The presence of a positive relation between year of birth and magnitude of effect sizes on the Mental Rotations Test contradicts Feingold's (1988) thesis. This test showed the largest mean effect size of all the tests sampled, and the correlation with year of birth suggests that when sex differences are large on a specific test, changes in attitudes or educational practices are not sufficient to reduce the magnitude of such differences. The failure of social changes to reduce the magnitude of sex differences on the Mental Rotations Test supports the claim that basic biological differences between females and males may play a role in determining cognitive sexdifferenceson this test and should not be discarded in favor of exclusively environmental explanations. However, biological factors alone cannot account better than environmental factors for an increase in the magnitude of sex differences in recent years. More empirical work is needed if we are to disentangle the influence of social, environmental, and biological factors on the magnitude of sex differences in spatial performance in general and on the Mental Rotations Test in particular.

     

    Which means that for the spatial test with the largest sex differences (Mental Rotations) the time effect is actually the opposite of what the "partial" statement in the abstract implies! Also notice that the title of this paper referred to "sex differences" as opposed to most of the others. In that web page as a whole there are 47 hits for "sex" and 107 hits for "gender".

    Given my sense of the bias in this field I suspect close examination of the other references as relate to their abstracts would expose more issues like this, but I don't have the patience to do it.

    When engaging with a field likely to have biases it is important to follow the chain of evidence all the way. Don't just look at the abstract, look at the full paper. And similarly when following the supporting references look at the full papers.

    Grumbling aside, your link is the best referenced and one of the least biased takes on the Damore affair that I have seen. Thanks again! I think their conclusion is worth reproducing here in full:

    3) OUR CONCLUSIONS
    The research findings are complicated, as you can see from the many abstracts containing both red and green text, and from the presence on both sides of the debate of some of the top researchers in psychology. Nonetheless, we think that the situation can be greatly clarified by distinguishing abilities from interests. We think the following three statements are supported by the research reviewed above:
    1. Gender differences in math/science ability, achievement, and performance are small or nil.* (See especially the studies by Hyde; see also this review paper by Spelke, 2005). The one exception to this statement seems to be spatial abilities, such as the ability to rotate 3-dimensional objects in one’s mind. This ability may be relevant in some areas of engineering, but it’s not clear why it would matter for coding. Thus, the large gender gap in coding (and in tech in general) cannot be explained as resulting to any substantial degree from differences in ability between men and women.
    2. Gender differences in interest and enjoyment of math, coding, and highly “systemizing” activities are large. The difference on traits related to preferences for “people vs. things” is found consistently and is very large, with some effect sizes exceeding 1.0. (See especially the meta-analyses by Su and her colleagues, and also see this review paper by Ceci & Williams, 2015).
    3. Culture and context matter, in complicated ways. Some gender differences have decreased over time as women have achieved greater equality, showing that these differences are responsive to changes in culture and environment. But the cross-national findings sometimes show “paradoxical” effects: progress toward gender equality in rights and opportunities sometimes leads to larger gender differences in some traits and career choices. Nonetheless, it seems that actions taken today by parents, teachers, politicians, and designers of tech products may increase the likelihood that girls will grow up to pursue careers in tech, and this is true whether or not biology plays a role in producing any particular population difference. (See this review paper by Eagly and Wood, 2013).
    Our verdict on Damore’s memo: Damore is correct that there are “population level differences in distributions” of traits that are likely to be relevant for understanding gender gaps at Google. Even if we set aside all questions about the origins of these differences, the fact remains that there are gender differences in a variety of traits, and especially in interest/enjoyment (rather than ability) in the adult population from which Google and all other tech firms recruit.
    This distinction between ability and interest is extremely important because it may lay to rest one of the main fears raised by Damore’s critics: that the memo itself will cause Google employees to assume that women are less qualified, or less “suited” for tech jobs, and will therefore lead to more bias against women in tech jobs. But the empirical evidence we have reviewed should have the opposite effect. Population differences in interest may be part of the explanation for why there are fewer women in the applicant pool, but the women who choose to enter the pool are just as capable as the larger number of men in the pool. This conclusion does not deny that various forms of bias, harassment, and discouragement exist and contribute to outcome disparities, nor does it imply that the differences in interest are biologically fixed and cannot be changed in future generations.
    If our three conclusions are correct (and we grant that they are open to debate), then Damore was drawing attention to empirical findings that seem to have been previously unknown or ignored at Google, and which might be helpful to the company as it tries to improve its diversity policies and outcomes. What should Google’s response to the memo have been?
    We’ll address Damore’s 3rd sentence in a followup post next week: “If we can’t have an honest discussion about this, then we can never truly solve the problem.”
     
    I do have to disagree with this from their first conclusion bullet: "Thus, the large gender gap in coding (and in tech in general) cannot be explained as resulting to any substantial degree from differences in ability between men and women."

    I disagree because there are differences in means for math ability and given that math ability tends to be highly selected for in coding thus tail effects are important. See James Thompson's blog for more discussion of this.

    And as far as "The one exception to this statement seems to be spatial abilities, such as the ability to rotate 3-dimensional objects in one’s mind. This ability may be relevant in some areas of engineering, but it’s not clear why it would matter for coding. " goes, see http://humantechnology.jyu.fi/articles/volume4/2008/jones-burnett.pdf

    A measure was taken of their mental rotation ability, and a questionnaire administered that focused on their previous academic experience, and expectations relating to the introductory computer programming module they were studying. The results showed a positive correlation between mental rotation ability and success in the module (r = 0.48).

     

    Perhaps someone can inform Sean Stevens and Jonathan Haidt of that since they obviously did not do even a cursory search on the topic. And this was some excellent weasel wording: "it’s not clear why it would matter for coding."

    P.S. OT, are you blue/green colorblind by chance (I don't think I am)? The color scheme appears as red/green to me (with the paper titles, etc. in blue providing a contrast) and the authors refer to it as red and green in the text.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  81. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @Quebecois race realist
    The racial gap is actually far more pronounced than the gender gap at Google.

    Black make up 1% of tech roles at Goole... is it 0.4% rounded to 1%?
    How many of these blacks are actually 25%, 50% or 75% white ancestry.
    Steve Jobs was panicked at the lack of black engineers at Apple. It's universal, not Google specific.

    But Charles Murray has been debunked right?

    Another gender stereotype: why Google founder Sergey Brin ditched his 40+ yr old wife for a new 20-something girlfriend?
    Is it because older men with money are attracted to young fertile female and vice-versa? You rarely see the opposite... I wonder why....

    Is it because older men with money are attracted to young fertile female and vice-versa? You rarely see the opposite… I wonder why….

    Don’t tell Chrissie. She thinks she’s still a prize!

    He was learning how to stand
    when I wore my first wedding band…

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  82. Olorin says:

    So this is all tied into the paranoid delusions over Safe Spaces and wearing Safety Pins after Trump’s election.

    Yet another parallel between this event and the maomaoing at The Evergreen State College.

    Here is TESC faculty luminary Naima Lowe, on November 9:

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  83. eah says:
    @Dave Pinsen
    Bloomberg's Emily Chang brought up the "what if the memo was about race?" argument in her interview with Damore. Damore could have handled this one a bit better, but I guess this was his first non-friendly interview after the Molyneaux and Peterson ones.

    https://twitter.com/dpinsen/status/895857802173968384

    Damore could have handled this one a bit better

    He should have just said ‘If it had been about race (instead of gender) it would have been similarly supported by facts and so I would defend it in the same way: #Fired4Truth’.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  84. eah says:

    Good idea.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  85. Grumpy says:

    There’s so much money to be made closing gaps! Can’t let James Damore ruin the party.

    What about the “gender data” gap? Don’t worry, the United Nations Foundation is throwing money at it.

    Without data equality, there is no gender equality.

    http://data2x.org/who-we-are/

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  86. @Quebecois race realist
    The racial gap is actually far more pronounced than the gender gap at Google.

    Black make up 1% of tech roles at Goole... is it 0.4% rounded to 1%?
    How many of these blacks are actually 25%, 50% or 75% white ancestry.
    Steve Jobs was panicked at the lack of black engineers at Apple. It's universal, not Google specific.

    But Charles Murray has been debunked right?

    Another gender stereotype: why Google founder Sergey Brin ditched his 40+ yr old wife for a new 20-something girlfriend?
    Is it because older men with money are attracted to young fertile female and vice-versa? You rarely see the opposite... I wonder why....

    Is it because older men with money are attracted to young fertile female and vice-versa? You rarely see the opposite… I wonder why….

    “Rarely see the opposite”?? Practically every rich old female actress or singer has a young and fertile trophy husband.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  87. Randal says:

    OT, another one for the taboo reinforcement absurdity file:

    CNN cuts ties with Jeffrey Lord over ‘Sieg Heil’ jibe

    CNN has parted company with a conservative commentator after he tweeted a Nazi salute at a prominent liberal critic.

    Jeffrey Lord tweeted “Sieg Heil” in response to an exchange with the head of Media Matters for America.

    He later said his comment had been misunderstood and that he was mocking fascists.

    A CNN spokesperson said in a statement: “Nazi salutes are indefensible. Jeffrey Lord is no longer with the network.”

    So a leftist partisan attack dog organisation gets to claim a “conservative” media scalp, and the stupidly, fanatically overblown Nazi/holocaust taboo that distorts and disfigures the societies of the modern US sphere gets reinforced yet again.

    Read More
    • Replies: @AndrewR
    I feel no sympathy for Lord or anyone else who calls leftists "Nazis" or racist whites "leftists." DEMZ R DA REAL NAZIS.

    Call commies commies.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  88. What is the Hindu Pinchai even doing in our America?

    Answer:To enthusiastically vote the Historic Native Born White American Majority Working Class into a racial minority…this is really the way more fundamental point…

    Over time, Google will pass into the hands of the Hindu…

    I want the Nation I was born and raised in….back!!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  89. Clyde says:

    pathetic conformists, only thing interesting about them is they are ultra wealthy. The same libs will go about “climate denialism”. Look at their denial of male-female differences in abilities tech and sciences.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  90. Eagle Eye says:
    @EriK
    YouTube loses money hand over fist.

    Pichai then started off gathering opinions from his direct reports — such as
    1.[Youtube honchette Susan] Wojcicki [haven't we heard that last name somewhere?],
    2. HR head Eileen Naughton, …
    3. communications head Jessica Powell …

    In other words:
    1. Boss’s sister-in-law/movie lady
    2. HR lady
    3. Press lady/spokeswoman.

    How much more stereotyped can one get? Shouldn’t there be at least 50% men in these roles?

    Read More
    • Agree: Clyde
    • Replies: @Clyde
    Women dominating HR offices is one of the biggest corporate scams ever. And just plain stupid. You want to have a mix of clear thinking people selecting your new employees. And HR/Human Resources is another word I would pay millions to see get nuked out of existence. No way do Chinese, Japanese, Taiwanese, Koreans, Indians hire people via offices that are 85%+ female.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  91. black sea says:

    Irrelevant perhaps, but I can’t get entirely past the fact that the title of the article in Recode (whatever that is) is not just ungrammatical and inelegant, but is strikingly, glaringly, gratingly so.

    How CEO Sundar Pichai made the decision to fire James Damore was just as hard as Google’s all-hands meeting today will be

    How does someone come up with a title like that, and what does it say about how her mind works?

    Just my two cents . . .

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  92. Pericles says:
    @MikeW
    If I had been at that executive meeting, I would have said, fire the jerk. If he's got major problems with something we consider core corporate policy, tell him to find an employer closer to his values.

    And that's what I would tell the public. NOT this nonsense about hurtful remarks, implying that women have fragile egos that need special care and coddling from upper management.

    “Have you looked at the badges on our caps recently? … Are we the baddies?”

    Read More
    • Replies: @Mr. Anon

    “Have you looked at the badges on our caps recently? … Are we the baddies?”
     
    Hah! Perhaps they think their enemies rally to the banner of the rats' anus.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  93. @Dave Pinsen
    Paul Graham is subtweeting about the James Damore affair.
    https://twitter.com/paulg/status/895892009063510016

    https://twitter.com/paulg/status/895517563509026817

    He also tweeted a link to this post by Scott Aaronson which is obviously inspired by James Damore getting fired but doesn't mention it at all and Scott warns he'll delete comments related to it.

    Questioning the Ptolemaic model is hurtful and NOT OK

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  94. @Roderick Spode
    that's two words

    In the original German it’s “Rassenverrater”, so one word.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  95. @anonguy

    Women take everything too personally.
     
    A more value-neutral and objective way of making your assertion would be women have a tendency to take things more personally than do men.

    Whether this is good or not is removed from the statement. You obviously think it is bad, while whoever designed women must have thought it good, if it is indeed true as you assert.

    That leads to two questions:

    1) Upon what do you base your claim that women take things more personally than men?

    2) Why is this bad? If it were bad, why would it be a pervasive trait of females assuming it does actually exist.

    Peter Frost in Evo and Proud studied this among others: essentially, “hysterical behavior” is pretty useful as a survival method to get more attention, and thus, more food when things are desperate. Its an useful measure, as selfish genetics go, but not for the tribe or group.

    Plenty of studies show that women generally affiliate tribe oddly, they tend to consider other women to be their in-group more than anything else. Men do not affiliate by sex at all.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anonguy

    Plenty of studies show that women generally affiliate tribe oddly, they tend to consider other women to be their in-group more than anything else. Men do not affiliate by sex at all.
     
    Interesting point. IME, the complaints women have about men seem much more consistent than the complaints men have about women, suggesting a more unified front.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  96. Mr. Anon says:
    @Pericles
    "Have you looked at the badges on our caps recently? ... Are we the baddies?"

    “Have you looked at the badges on our caps recently? … Are we the baddies?”

    Hah! Perhaps they think their enemies rally to the banner of the rats’ anus.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  97. Bill says:
    @Dave, From Oz
    As I suggest everywhere this topic comes up: prosecute large-scale employers of illegal aliens under the RICO act. An orchard industry that relies on illegal labour almost certainly dabbles in immigration fraud: one of the specific crimes mentioned in the act. An industry that systemically from top to bottom relies on crime to operate, that could not continue with its current practices without criminal activity, is precisely what a "corrupt organization" *is*.

    Start throwing the bosses of large, billion-dollar agricultural corporations in prison for racketeering. Oh, and have the local cops start going after people who hire illegal alien household servants, fry cooks, etc.

    You don't need new laws: you just need to start enforcing the laws you already have, with the goal that people will start - you know - obeying them. What a shame the USA has mostly destroyed its unions. A few teamsters fighting for their jobs would sort out the illegals.

    Hey, that’s my shtick. We’ll know that we have an anti-illegal-immigration administration when the first C-suite guy goes to federal prison for a long time. And, by the way, if the RICO is giving campaign contributions to some Congressmen, isn’t that cause for some kind of extensive investigation of such Congressmen?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  98. Bill says:
    @anonguy

    Women take everything too personally.
     
    A more value-neutral and objective way of making your assertion would be women have a tendency to take things more personally than do men.

    Whether this is good or not is removed from the statement. You obviously think it is bad, while whoever designed women must have thought it good, if it is indeed true as you assert.

    That leads to two questions:

    1) Upon what do you base your claim that women take things more personally than men?

    2) Why is this bad? If it were bad, why would it be a pervasive trait of females assuming it does actually exist.

    1) Upon what do you base your claim that women take things more personally than men?

    2) Why is this bad?

    This is an excellent example of why scientism is so toxic. Any idea can be protected via the endless deployment of strategic nihilism and the is/ought dichotomy. “I refute Berkeley thus” is a sensible answer to questions like this.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  99. anonguy says:
    @Daniel Chieh
    Peter Frost in Evo and Proud studied this among others: essentially, "hysterical behavior" is pretty useful as a survival method to get more attention, and thus, more food when things are desperate. Its an useful measure, as selfish genetics go, but not for the tribe or group.

    Plenty of studies show that women generally affiliate tribe oddly, they tend to consider other women to be their in-group more than anything else. Men do not affiliate by sex at all.

    Plenty of studies show that women generally affiliate tribe oddly, they tend to consider other women to be their in-group more than anything else. Men do not affiliate by sex at all.

    Interesting point. IME, the complaints women have about men seem much more consistent than the complaints men have about women, suggesting a more unified front.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  100. Whether the earth orbits the sun is a question to be determined by research, not church policy.

    The difference between liberalism and Christianity is that the latter is not antagonistic toward rationality, but actually embraces it. As early as the 4thC Augustine was arguing that observation and reason should not defer to a literal interpretation of scripture. And of course, the great thinkers in physics were trying to discover God’s laws.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  101. @Moshe
    Uh, can I point out that there's something dishonest about the bunch'a'ya anti-(((neocons))) who talked and talked and talked about the insanity of war and yet this isn't the subject of 7 stories and 5,000 comments?

    It started yesterday.

    Fire and fury the likes of which the world has never seen before.



    https://youtu.be/AHnFgN3CAU8

    https://youtu.be/HJoQldVYB2M

    Try not to wet your panties. Trump’s gambit puts pressure on China to rein in it’s annoying little client to the South. North Korea is a chihuahua – bark big, bite lite. Since any hot war would explode on China’s patio, NK will be frozen out – if something happens to us, China’s economy will go 1929; we’re it’s biggest loan sucker. I’m glad the ers of suck-up foreign policy is over. For lack of a better term, revolution will do.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jim Don Bob
    I've already used up my Agree button or I would hit it twice for you.

    DJT's public perception as somewhat unhinged is helping here. China does not want a nuclear war on its borders, and it needs our markets more than we need them. That little moron in NK has outlived his usefulness to everybody; China should arrange him an accident and let the two Koreas re-unite peacefully ala Germany.

    A lot of people will die in a Korean war but NK will cease to exist and be radioactive forever. The first thing we will do is drop PGMs on everywhere we think Dear Leader is. That should get their attention.

    , @reiner Tor
    No, you are an idiot. Probably you were waving your flag "U-S-A! U-S-A!" when Dubya started his idiotic war in Iraq. North Korea is not America's business, it's the Koreans' business, and if the US doesn't like a few Nork nukes (besides the hundreds of Chinese and thousands of Russian nukes) pointed at its cities, then they should just leave the peninsula, automatically making North Korea China's problem.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  102. @JW
    There's much ruin in a company. Google has several monopolies, it's not clear market forces can dethrone them. Intel has been going down Google's path for years and years. Google's VP of diversity came from Intel.

    Charlie Munger, Berkshire Hathaway Vice-Chairman, has said that Google has the deepest “moat” in the world.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  103. @Raekwon

    “To suggest a group of our colleagues have traits that make them less biologically suited to that work is offensive and not OK.”
     
    Except that the women who are googlers are ostensibly biologically suited for google.

    Time for the ol' comp sci joke: There are 10 types of people in this world. Those who understand statistics (normal distribution, standard deviation, kurtosis, skewness, mean, mode, r^2, p etc.) and those who don't.

    Except that the women who are googlers are ostensibly biologically suited for google.

    Maybe so, but maybe they’ve been boosted by the Diversity initiatives that irk Damore.

    It’s sort of well known in BigLaw that the diversity hires have a shelf life – very, very few become equity partners, and the best behaved ones go on to jobs within the firm like “director of minority recruiting” or “director of pro-bono services.” Their non-diversity hire peers get to do the heavy lifting to make up for the lost productivity of having an attorney without the requisite aptitude to do actual high level legal work.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  104. res says:
    @candid_observer
    Interestingly, and importantly, Damore himself didn't allow himself to get baited into a discussion of the biological implications of race:

    Damore's treatise invited derision internally as well. At one point on Friday, on a thread titled "Why the focus on sex instead of race?," a Google employee noted that "the paper is striking at a lot of people’s values. But I think it’s failing to bite an important bullet, failing to follow its ideas to their inevitable conclusion." Then, in an apparent attempt to highlight the absurdity of Damore's case, the employee asks, "Does the author think we should be more willing to consider essentialist explanations for the company’s racial makeup?"

    Damore, however, seems to have missed the question's sardonic framing.

    Rather than dismiss race science out of hand, Damore responds that he doesn't "know as much about racial issues" as he does about "gender ones." He goes on to claim, "Also, women and men have repeatedly been shown to have biologically driven differences in population level distributions of traits so it’s much easier to understand some of the forces (and their solution) behind the gender gap."

    Eventually, Damore takes offense as he catches on: "I’ve been told by multiple people that you’re trying to bait me into saying something to get me fired and that you’ve done it before. This is perhaps the least Googley thing I’ve heard anyone do, please stop.”
     

    https://www.wired.com/story/internal-messages-james-damore-google-memo?mbid=social_twitter

    Damore's approach is going to make it a lot harder for people to nail him and disappear him.

    The top rated comment on that Wired article had a link to an interesting Bloomberg article from a few weeks ago:
    Deloitte Thinks Diversity Groups Are Passé

    https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-07-19/deloitte-thinks-diversity-groups-are-pass

    The firm is nixing employee affinity groups for women and minorities—fixtures at many large companies—and replacing them with inclusion councils that have white men.

    A follow up article: https://www.cebglobal.com/talentdaily/will-deloittes-new-di-strategy-increase-participation-from-allies/

    Has anyone here seen the Harvard Business Review diversity and inclusion special issue from July-August 2016? Any comments?

    https://www.cebglobal.com/talentdaily/the-harvard-diversity-review/

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  105. res says:
    @Alden
    I wonder why he wrote the memo? Was he in some sort of diversity committe charged with hiring and promoting more women and minorities? Does he have to work with incompetent women and do their work?

    Maybe he's retirement age and wants to go out with a bang.

    If you listen to the interviews he was recently involved in some diversity summits. He was calling attention to what he saw as borderline illegal activities in Google’s hiring process. See this excerpt from his memo:

    The harm of Google’s biases
    I strongly believe in gender and racial diversity, and I think we should strive for more. However, to achieve a more equal gender and race representation, Google has created several discriminatory practices:
    ● Programs, mentoring, and classes only for people with a certain gender or race5
    ● A high priority queue and special treatment for “diversity” candidates
    ● Hiring practices which can effectively lower the bar for “diversity” candidates by decreasing the false negative rate
    ● Reconsidering any set of people if it’s not “diverse” enough, but not showing that same scrutiny in the reverse direction (clear confirmation bias)
    ● Setting org level OKRs for increased representation which can incentivize illegal discrimination6

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  106. res says:
    @Dave Pinsen
    Paul Graham is subtweeting about the James Damore affair.
    https://twitter.com/paulg/status/895892009063510016

    https://twitter.com/paulg/status/895517563509026817

    He also tweeted a link to this post by Scott Aaronson which is obviously inspired by James Damore getting fired but doesn't mention it at all and Scott warns he'll delete comments related to it.

    That is an interesting and highly relevant post by Scott Aaronson. I was intrigued by the particular way in which he chose to censor this comment (e.g. not just flushing it):

    wolfgang Says:
    Comment #25 August 9th, 2017 at 6:38 am
    Scott,

    you just wrote a long and interesting blog post about Kolmogorov, just to not comment on this [REDACTED]

    Why are you so afraid of just telling us the truth – which is that the whole world has gone nuts and there is nothing anyone can do about it.

    I liked this comment (too long to include) relating things to McCarthyism: http://www.scottaaronson.com/blog/?p=3376#comment-1741493

    The Scott-Liz dialog (comments 101-106) is interesting. I wonder if Liz would have been baying for blood if Scott had been more explicit.

    Read More
    • Replies: @candid_observer
    I took a quick look at Aaronson's post, and thought it just stupid and perverse.

    What's the point of coming at the Damore issue only indirectly like that?

    Of course there are circumstances in which its best not to tell the full truth, or even to lie outright. Kolgomorov, under Stalin, would be a good example. And of course this sort of issue goes back at least to Kant, who, quite absurdly, argued that it would not be permissible to lie even to save someone's life.

    But what is even possibly the point of discussing the Kolgomorov case in Damore's circumstances? Where's Stalin, with his unaccountable capacity for maximum punishment? (Of course, in that analogy, isn't it more like Google management and our SJWs who come closer to possess that ability, not isolated, powerless Damore?)

    Everything important about the Damore case is peculiar to the precise context of it: the potential for societal harm, in either direction, the importance of telling this particular truth, the likely inevitability of the truth coming out in the fullness of time. Why pretend that one can deal with the case while avoiding talking about its specific features?

    Really, his posing of the problem, then deleting all specific comments is, again, stupid and perverse.
    , @Dave Pinsen
    I also give Scott credit for publishing my comment (#146):

    Scott,

    You’re a coward.

    If you were risking the Gulag or the torture rack, I wouldn’t say that, but you’re not, so you’re a coward.
     
    , @Jack D
    I no longer remember the details of the kerfuffle but didn't Aaronson himself once get in big trouble with the PC Police for something that he said on his blog (that would have been innocuous in a sane society)? So once burned, twice shy. It's true that in our society they don't literally come and drag you away to the Gulag or torture you on the rack but what they do do is bad enough that I don't want it for myself, so I don't blame the man.

    Reading between the lines, he is pretty much saying that we are living through a period that is not unlike the Soviet purges. That in itself is a pretty heavy duty thing to say to those that are in charge now. Compare that to what Pikachu said about how many wonderful messages of support he's gotten from Google employees, both those who are fully down with the program and those who want to kiss his butt just so he will leave them alone. Compare to those brownshirts and brown-nosers, Aaronson is a hero just for writing this much. I am not in favor of ideological shit tests on the right - everyone should do what they are comfortable doing, publicly or privately. If you want to do more, to set yourself on fire in front of the Googleplex or whatever, then bully for you but don't tell me what to do.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  107. AndrewR says:
    @MikeW
    If I had been at that executive meeting, I would have said, fire the jerk. If he's got major problems with something we consider core corporate policy, tell him to find an employer closer to his values.

    And that's what I would tell the public. NOT this nonsense about hurtful remarks, implying that women have fragile egos that need special care and coddling from upper management.

    I hope you are never allowed any supervisory position ever.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  108. AndrewR says:
    @Cagey Beast
    James Damore would have led Qaddafi style, Viagra-fuelled, alt-right rape squads on the Google campus if he hadn't been stopped in time. He probably would have ridden around Silicon Valley on a horse with his shirt off too, just like his paymaster, Putin.

    Oops I meant to hit “LOL.” Webmaster, can we get an option to undo reactions?

    Read More
    • Replies: @res
    Last time I checked later actions overrode earlier actions. This was a change from the original functionality where a single commenter could have all of those tags active at once.

    Try hitting LOL now and see if it does what you want.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  109. AndrewR says:
    @Randal
    OT, another one for the taboo reinforcement absurdity file:

    CNN cuts ties with Jeffrey Lord over 'Sieg Heil' jibe

    CNN has parted company with a conservative commentator after he tweeted a Nazi salute at a prominent liberal critic.

    Jeffrey Lord tweeted "Sieg Heil" in response to an exchange with the head of Media Matters for America.

    He later said his comment had been misunderstood and that he was mocking fascists.

    A CNN spokesperson said in a statement: "Nazi salutes are indefensible. Jeffrey Lord is no longer with the network."
     
    So a leftist partisan attack dog organisation gets to claim a "conservative" media scalp, and the stupidly, fanatically overblown Nazi/holocaust taboo that distorts and disfigures the societies of the modern US sphere gets reinforced yet again.

    I feel no sympathy for Lord or anyone else who calls leftists “Nazis” or racist whites “leftists.” DEMZ R DA REAL NAZIS.

    Call commies commies.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  110. @Ivy
    "Not OK".
    That was the language of pre-schoolers when they were first learning to use their words.

    yeah, that’s what I was thinking. He’s talking to the employees like they’re children. That’s not OK.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  111. @res
    That is an interesting and highly relevant post by Scott Aaronson. I was intrigued by the particular way in which he chose to censor this comment (e.g. not just flushing it):

    wolfgang Says:
    Comment #25 August 9th, 2017 at 6:38 am
    Scott,

    you just wrote a long and interesting blog post about Kolmogorov, just to not comment on this [REDACTED]

    Why are you so afraid of just telling us the truth – which is that the whole world has gone nuts and there is nothing anyone can do about it.
     
    I liked this comment (too long to include) relating things to McCarthyism: http://www.scottaaronson.com/blog/?p=3376#comment-1741493

    The Scott-Liz dialog (comments 101-106) is interesting. I wonder if Liz would have been baying for blood if Scott had been more explicit.

    I took a quick look at Aaronson’s post, and thought it just stupid and perverse.

    What’s the point of coming at the Damore issue only indirectly like that?

    Of course there are circumstances in which its best not to tell the full truth, or even to lie outright. Kolgomorov, under Stalin, would be a good example. And of course this sort of issue goes back at least to Kant, who, quite absurdly, argued that it would not be permissible to lie even to save someone’s life.

    But what is even possibly the point of discussing the Kolgomorov case in Damore’s circumstances? Where’s Stalin, with his unaccountable capacity for maximum punishment? (Of course, in that analogy, isn’t it more like Google management and our SJWs who come closer to possess that ability, not isolated, powerless Damore?)

    Everything important about the Damore case is peculiar to the precise context of it: the potential for societal harm, in either direction, the importance of telling this particular truth, the likely inevitability of the truth coming out in the fullness of time. Why pretend that one can deal with the case while avoiding talking about its specific features?

    Really, his posing of the problem, then deleting all specific comments is, again, stupid and perverse.

    Read More
    • Replies: @res

    What’s the point of coming at the Damore issue only indirectly like that?
     
    To not get fired. Or go through the internet lynch mob ritual defamation routine again (he has experience with that!).

    Really, his posing of the problem, then deleting all specific comments is, again, stupid and perverse.
     
    Did you note the redacted comment I quoted? I think the way in which he did that says a lot.

    Additional reasons I see for his approach:
    - There is some chance of getting people to listen if the trigger is removed (though his cutesy comments alluding to Damore undermine this).
    - It actually IMHO does raise many of the relevant issues. I think Scott is making the Google (and SJWs)/Stalin and Damore/Kolgomorov comparisons you desire.

    In my ideal world he would say what he really thinks, but he is speaking more truth than 99% of the people in this conversation under their own names (we are both using pseudonyms!). It is hard for me to complain about that.

    I am interested in talking about this further if you are. I respect your comments here and am surprised we have such divergent reactions to that piece.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  112. res says:
    @FactsAreImportant
    This looks like an interesting summary of the relevant research.

    Surprisingly readable. The red/blue color scheme is very helpful.

    https://heterodoxacademy.org/2017/08/10/the-google-memo-what-does-the-research-say-about-gender-differences/

    Thanks! That has an excellent collection of references and useful summaries for each. One issue is that I think the “summaries” are the abstracts and in my experience abstracts tend to be weighted to emphasize the more Narrative affirming conclusions (here that sex differences are minimal and decreasing over time as society becomes more equal).

    I do think the authors have some bias against the existence of sex differences. For example, consider these two statements considered positive and negative respectively:

    Results showed that sex differences are significant in several tests but that some intertest differences exist.

    Partial support was found for the notion that the magnitude of sex differences has decreased in recent years.

    I think the strength of these two statements differs. Particularly interesting is that when I dig into the body of the paper I find:

    The presence of a positive relation between year of birth and magnitude of effect sizes on the Mental Rotations Test contradicts Feingold’s (1988) thesis. This test showed the largest mean effect size of all the tests sampled, and the correlation with year of birth suggests that when sex differences are large on a specific test, changes in attitudes or educational practices are not sufficient to reduce the magnitude of such differences. The failure of social changes to reduce the magnitude of sex differences on the Mental Rotations Test supports the claim that basic biological differences between females and males may play a role in determining cognitive sexdifferenceson this test and should not be discarded in favor of exclusively environmental explanations. However, biological factors alone cannot account better than environmental factors for an increase in the magnitude of sex differences in recent years. More empirical work is needed if we are to disentangle the influence of social, environmental, and biological factors on the magnitude of sex differences in spatial performance in general and on the Mental Rotations Test in particular.

    Which means that for the spatial test with the largest sex differences (Mental Rotations) the time effect is actually the opposite of what the “partial” statement in the abstract implies! Also notice that the title of this paper referred to “sex differences” as opposed to most of the others. In that web page as a whole there are 47 hits for “sex” and 107 hits for “gender”.

    Given my sense of the bias in this field I suspect close examination of the other references as relate to their abstracts would expose more issues like this, but I don’t have the patience to do it.

    When engaging with a field likely to have biases it is important to follow the chain of evidence all the way. Don’t just look at the abstract, look at the full paper. And similarly when following the supporting references look at the full papers.

    Grumbling aside, your link is the best referenced and one of the least biased takes on the Damore affair that I have seen. Thanks again! I think their conclusion is worth reproducing here in full:

    3) OUR CONCLUSIONS
    The research findings are complicated, as you can see from the many abstracts containing both red and green text, and from the presence on both sides of the debate of some of the top researchers in psychology. Nonetheless, we think that the situation can be greatly clarified by distinguishing abilities from interests. We think the following three statements are supported by the research reviewed above:
    1. Gender differences in math/science ability, achievement, and performance are small or nil.* (See especially the studies by Hyde; see also this review paper by Spelke, 2005). The one exception to this statement seems to be spatial abilities, such as the ability to rotate 3-dimensional objects in one’s mind. This ability may be relevant in some areas of engineering, but it’s not clear why it would matter for coding. Thus, the large gender gap in coding (and in tech in general) cannot be explained as resulting to any substantial degree from differences in ability between men and women.
    2. Gender differences in interest and enjoyment of math, coding, and highly “systemizing” activities are large. The difference on traits related to preferences for “people vs. things” is found consistently and is very large, with some effect sizes exceeding 1.0. (See especially the meta-analyses by Su and her colleagues, and also see this review paper by Ceci & Williams, 2015).
    3. Culture and context matter, in complicated ways. Some gender differences have decreased over time as women have achieved greater equality, showing that these differences are responsive to changes in culture and environment. But the cross-national findings sometimes show “paradoxical” effects: progress toward gender equality in rights and opportunities sometimes leads to larger gender differences in some traits and career choices. Nonetheless, it seems that actions taken today by parents, teachers, politicians, and designers of tech products may increase the likelihood that girls will grow up to pursue careers in tech, and this is true whether or not biology plays a role in producing any particular population difference. (See this review paper by Eagly and Wood, 2013).
    Our verdict on Damore’s memo: Damore is correct that there are “population level differences in distributions” of traits that are likely to be relevant for understanding gender gaps at Google. Even if we set aside all questions about the origins of these differences, the fact remains that there are gender differences in a variety of traits, and especially in interest/enjoyment (rather than ability) in the adult population from which Google and all other tech firms recruit.
    This distinction between ability and interest is extremely important because it may lay to rest one of the main fears raised by Damore’s critics: that the memo itself will cause Google employees to assume that women are less qualified, or less “suited” for tech jobs, and will therefore lead to more bias against women in tech jobs. But the empirical evidence we have reviewed should have the opposite effect. Population differences in interest may be part of the explanation for why there are fewer women in the applicant pool, but the women who choose to enter the pool are just as capable as the larger number of men in the pool. This conclusion does not deny that various forms of bias, harassment, and discouragement exist and contribute to outcome disparities, nor does it imply that the differences in interest are biologically fixed and cannot be changed in future generations.
    If our three conclusions are correct (and we grant that they are open to debate), then Damore was drawing attention to empirical findings that seem to have been previously unknown or ignored at Google, and which might be helpful to the company as it tries to improve its diversity policies and outcomes. What should Google’s response to the memo have been?
    We’ll address Damore’s 3rd sentence in a followup post next week: “If we can’t have an honest discussion about this, then we can never truly solve the problem.”

    I do have to disagree with this from their first conclusion bullet: “Thus, the large gender gap in coding (and in tech in general) cannot be explained as resulting to any substantial degree from differences in ability between men and women.”

    I disagree because there are differences in means for math ability and given that math ability tends to be highly selected for in coding thus tail effects are important. See James Thompson’s blog for more discussion of this.

    And as far as “The one exception to this statement seems to be spatial abilities, such as the ability to rotate 3-dimensional objects in one’s mind. This ability may be relevant in some areas of engineering, but it’s not clear why it would matter for coding. ” goes, see http://humantechnology.jyu.fi/articles/volume4/2008/jones-burnett.pdf

    A measure was taken of their mental rotation ability, and a questionnaire administered that focused on their previous academic experience, and expectations relating to the introductory computer programming module they were studying. The results showed a positive correlation between mental rotation ability and success in the module (r = 0.48).

    Perhaps someone can inform Sean Stevens and Jonathan Haidt of that since they obviously did not do even a cursory search on the topic. And this was some excellent weasel wording: “it’s not clear why it would matter for coding.”

    P.S. OT, are you blue/green colorblind by chance (I don’t think I am)? The color scheme appears as red/green to me (with the paper titles, etc. in blue providing a contrast) and the authors refer to it as red and green in the text.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  113. res says:
    @candid_observer
    I took a quick look at Aaronson's post, and thought it just stupid and perverse.

    What's the point of coming at the Damore issue only indirectly like that?

    Of course there are circumstances in which its best not to tell the full truth, or even to lie outright. Kolgomorov, under Stalin, would be a good example. And of course this sort of issue goes back at least to Kant, who, quite absurdly, argued that it would not be permissible to lie even to save someone's life.

    But what is even possibly the point of discussing the Kolgomorov case in Damore's circumstances? Where's Stalin, with his unaccountable capacity for maximum punishment? (Of course, in that analogy, isn't it more like Google management and our SJWs who come closer to possess that ability, not isolated, powerless Damore?)

    Everything important about the Damore case is peculiar to the precise context of it: the potential for societal harm, in either direction, the importance of telling this particular truth, the likely inevitability of the truth coming out in the fullness of time. Why pretend that one can deal with the case while avoiding talking about its specific features?

    Really, his posing of the problem, then deleting all specific comments is, again, stupid and perverse.

    What’s the point of coming at the Damore issue only indirectly like that?

    To not get fired. Or go through the internet lynch mob ritual defamation routine again (he has experience with that!).

    Really, his posing of the problem, then deleting all specific comments is, again, stupid and perverse.

    Did you note the redacted comment I quoted? I think the way in which he did that says a lot.

    Additional reasons I see for his approach:
    - There is some chance of getting people to listen if the trigger is removed (though his cutesy comments alluding to Damore undermine this).
    - It actually IMHO does raise many of the relevant issues. I think Scott is making the Google (and SJWs)/Stalin and Damore/Kolgomorov comparisons you desire.

    In my ideal world he would say what he really thinks, but he is speaking more truth than 99% of the people in this conversation under their own names (we are both using pseudonyms!). It is hard for me to complain about that.

    I am interested in talking about this further if you are. I respect your comments here and am surprised we have such divergent reactions to that piece.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  114. whoever says: • Website
    @anonguy

    Women take everything too personally.
     
    A more value-neutral and objective way of making your assertion would be women have a tendency to take things more personally than do men.

    Whether this is good or not is removed from the statement. You obviously think it is bad, while whoever designed women must have thought it good, if it is indeed true as you assert.

    That leads to two questions:

    1) Upon what do you base your claim that women take things more personally than men?

    2) Why is this bad? If it were bad, why would it be a pervasive trait of females assuming it does actually exist.

    I’d add that many men take things too personally, as well. You can see it every day in comment sections, where disagreements over the most trivial foolishness become snarling, insult-laden contests of will and quests for social dominance.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  115. Lurker says:
    @Jack D

    “I think the problem and also benefit of Google has been that we’ve created and encouraged an environment where everyone thinks they can say what they want, because that is what has always been the way it has been,” said another top exec. “But, at some point, if we really want to change, we have to think harder about what impact that has, especially when it makes women or others feel unsafe in the environment we have created.”
     
    This is the money quote. This was not just canning some nobody. It was crossing the Rubicon, the turning point from which there is no going back. Before this week, Google was an organization where the most important value was speaking the truth, getting stuff done. But now it is just another libtard nursery where the most important value is to create a "safe space" for their infantile charges. This is the day that marks the beginning of the end at Google.

    Yes. It’s a turning point. We all know Google is just another crappy company but until now one could sort of be carried along by the image of it being something special. They’ve killed that and killed it in the eyes of geek/nerd types who might have been supportive or worked there.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  116. Lurker says:
    @Dave Pinsen
    Google is run by an Indian-American, Sundar Pichai. The executive chairman of its parent company, Alphabet, is a German-American gentile named Eric Schmidt. The two Jewish co-founders serve below him as president and CEO, respectively.

    But who really gives the orders? The two guys who founded the company and retain a controlling interest or the German figurehead and the diversity window dressing?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  117. Jack D says:
    @JW
    There's much ruin in a company. Google has several monopolies, it's not clear market forces can dethrone them. Intel has been going down Google's path for years and years. Google's VP of diversity came from Intel.

    I don’t disagree, but still I think this means that they are at or near their high water mark and the decline begins now. It might take 10 or 20 or 30 years to empty the vast reservoir but once the dam has been breached the outcome is inevitable. How many future Damores will interview elsewhere? How many dead weight SJW’s will seek to take his place? How long until some users start to notice the difference? At Mizzou the impact was felt in a matter of months.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  118. @Anonymous
    What is the starting point book to read on whether there are cognitive and behavioral differences between races?

    What is the starting point book to read on whether there are cognitive and behavioral differences between races?

    There’s no need to read books, as it’s all plainly observable.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  119. Dave Pinsen says: • Website
    @res
    That is an interesting and highly relevant post by Scott Aaronson. I was intrigued by the particular way in which he chose to censor this comment (e.g. not just flushing it):

    wolfgang Says:
    Comment #25 August 9th, 2017 at 6:38 am
    Scott,

    you just wrote a long and interesting blog post about Kolmogorov, just to not comment on this [REDACTED]

    Why are you so afraid of just telling us the truth – which is that the whole world has gone nuts and there is nothing anyone can do about it.
     
    I liked this comment (too long to include) relating things to McCarthyism: http://www.scottaaronson.com/blog/?p=3376#comment-1741493

    The Scott-Liz dialog (comments 101-106) is interesting. I wonder if Liz would have been baying for blood if Scott had been more explicit.

    I also give Scott credit for publishing my comment (#146):

    Scott,

    You’re a coward.

    If you were risking the Gulag or the torture rack, I wouldn’t say that, but you’re not, so you’re a coward.

    Read More
    • Agree: res
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  120. @Daniel Chieh
    Women take everything too personally.

    Women take everything. FIFY.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  121. @anonguy
    I don't doubt you at all, just seems incredible to me that any CS grad of CMU wouldn't have multiple job offers regardless of his race.

    Wanna bet?

    http://www.latimes.com/business/hiltzik/la-fi-mh-the-scandal-of-engineering-visas-20160226-column.html

    Granted, a CMU grad might have a lower chance of not securing employment. All the ones I’ve met have been brilliant. But perhaps not the best at talking themselves into jobs, being almost painfully shy.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  122. res says:
    @AndrewR
    Oops I meant to hit "LOL." Webmaster, can we get an option to undo reactions?

    Last time I checked later actions overrode earlier actions. This was a change from the original functionality where a single commenter could have all of those tags active at once.

    Try hitting LOL now and see if it does what you want.

    Read More
    • Replies: @AndrewR
    Fanx bruv
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  123. AndrewR says:
    @res
    Last time I checked later actions overrode earlier actions. This was a change from the original functionality where a single commenter could have all of those tags active at once.

    Try hitting LOL now and see if it does what you want.

    Fanx bruv

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  124. Jack D says:
    @res
    That is an interesting and highly relevant post by Scott Aaronson. I was intrigued by the particular way in which he chose to censor this comment (e.g. not just flushing it):

    wolfgang Says:
    Comment #25 August 9th, 2017 at 6:38 am
    Scott,

    you just wrote a long and interesting blog post about Kolmogorov, just to not comment on this [REDACTED]

    Why are you so afraid of just telling us the truth – which is that the whole world has gone nuts and there is nothing anyone can do about it.
     
    I liked this comment (too long to include) relating things to McCarthyism: http://www.scottaaronson.com/blog/?p=3376#comment-1741493

    The Scott-Liz dialog (comments 101-106) is interesting. I wonder if Liz would have been baying for blood if Scott had been more explicit.

    I no longer remember the details of the kerfuffle but didn’t Aaronson himself once get in big trouble with the PC Police for something that he said on his blog (that would have been innocuous in a sane society)? So once burned, twice shy. It’s true that in our society they don’t literally come and drag you away to the Gulag or torture you on the rack but what they do do is bad enough that I don’t want it for myself, so I don’t blame the man.

    Reading between the lines, he is pretty much saying that we are living through a period that is not unlike the Soviet purges. That in itself is a pretty heavy duty thing to say to those that are in charge now. Compare that to what Pikachu said about how many wonderful messages of support he’s gotten from Google employees, both those who are fully down with the program and those who want to kiss his butt just so he will leave them alone. Compare to those brownshirts and brown-nosers, Aaronson is a hero just for writing this much. I am not in favor of ideological shit tests on the right – everyone should do what they are comfortable doing, publicly or privately. If you want to do more, to set yourself on fire in front of the Googleplex or whatever, then bully for you but don’t tell me what to do.

    Read More
    • Replies: @res
    He did get in trouble, and IMHO it was even worse than the usual because he was attacked after posting something that was intensely personal. Amanda Marcotte had a "starring" role (searching for her name and Scott Aaronson's will get more details). Here is Scott Alexander's take for anyone who wants to revisit what happened: http://slatestarcodex.com/2015/01/01/untitled/

    It will be interesting to see if Aaronson gets any blowback from what he wrote this time.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  125. MarcB. says:
    @Google Clowns
    That explains it. The weak Indian puppet was surrounded by women and Jews, like Obama, none could think for themselves, but together they re-enforced one another's twisted views and became a pack of hyenas. They could've easily issued a statement saying "What Damore expressed was his personal opinion, which he is entitled to as an individual. It does not represent any kind of consensus at Google nor does it represent the opinion of Google management." And that would've been the end of it. Instead it's now turned into a major imbroglio and is making the entire Google management look like the ass clowns that they are.

    Couldn't have happened to a better company. These leftist hypocrite ass clowns got what they deserved.

    “Couldn’t have happened to a better company. These leftist hypocrite ass clowns got what they deserved”.

    And they’ve shown it to the entire world. There will definitely be some people on the Good White side saying, “wait a minute, I don’t think I heard/read that correctly.” They’ve overplayed their hand, and this will result in a public relations disaster that will burn slowly for years.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  126. @San Fernando Curt
    Try not to wet your panties. Trump's gambit puts pressure on China to rein in it's annoying little client to the South. North Korea is a chihuahua - bark big, bite lite. Since any hot war would explode on China's patio, NK will be frozen out - if something happens to us, China's economy will go 1929; we're it's biggest loan sucker. I'm glad the ers of suck-up foreign policy is over. For lack of a better term, revolution will do.

    I’ve already used up my Agree button or I would hit it twice for you.

    DJT’s public perception as somewhat unhinged is helping here. China does not want a nuclear war on its borders, and it needs our markets more than we need them. That little moron in NK has outlived his usefulness to everybody; China should arrange him an accident and let the two Koreas re-unite peacefully ala Germany.

    A lot of people will die in a Korean war but NK will cease to exist and be radioactive forever. The first thing we will do is drop PGMs on everywhere we think Dear Leader is. That should get their attention.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  127. @Anonymous
    Where's the relief thread on Taylor Swift's ASS!?

    Let's do a dissertation on the unbelievable firm young female ass that is now on public display--streetwalker style--on American sidewalks coast to coast... (social trend imported from late stage democracies in Euro-Med zone) and how this situation dovetails with the TS grabass courtroom drama.

    What cannot be denied is that average American girls are putting their asses in our faces like never before, and simultaneously the professional showbiz bootyshakers asses are not allowed to be touched.

    Q: Would TS drag Tom Brady into court for grabbing her ass? How about David Beckham? DiCaprio?

    It's clear: the flyover country DJ didn't have high enough alpha male status to get away with that epic TS assgrab. The entire kerfuffle is a matter of status. Brad Pitt could've grabbed her ass ALL DAY LONG and received strong approval from both Taylor and her mother.

    PS Elon Musk could have also gotten away with this horrible "crime", because mega $$$ = super alpha status. And when super alphas attack, the smart pretty girls lay back and enjoy it. And they aren't faking the orgasm!

    He didn’t do it IMHO.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  128. MBlanc46 says:
    @Whiskey
    Again more evidence that women are the natural and eternal enemy of White men; at least Upper Class White women and those who aspire to that status or follow them. White women have broadly allied themselves with non-Whites against the mutual hated enemy: White men. Who are HATE HATE HATED for being fractionally smarter than their non-White male peers, for the most part.

    Why all the anti-White male venom? Because White men are simply too higher IQ to engage in the domination rituals and highly aggressive physical personal behavior in men that White women crave; and so the excuses and ritual abasements before Muslims, Black men, etc. Duh.

    TLDR: White women broke up with Beta Male Bob to get with Wife-Beater Ahmed. Who only hits them because he loves them and makes other men afraid. That's it. And that's public and private policy in government and corporations writ large. There is no end of ways in which White women are the natural and eternal enemy of White men. Which means the dominance bid by White men must go up marginally much higher than the competition.

    Google will likely be nearly White male free in the engineering / tech dept in two years time, I'll bet. And will crater in that time as well, technically at least. I've switched to Bing; and I expect a lot of people to do so as well.

    You’ve probably over-egged the pudding by a tad, but there’s much to what you say. The hostility that white women have directed against white men for the past fifty years demonstrates beyond question that they despise us.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  129. MBlanc46 says:
    @Dave, From Oz
    As I suggest everywhere this topic comes up: prosecute large-scale employers of illegal aliens under the RICO act. An orchard industry that relies on illegal labour almost certainly dabbles in immigration fraud: one of the specific crimes mentioned in the act. An industry that systemically from top to bottom relies on crime to operate, that could not continue with its current practices without criminal activity, is precisely what a "corrupt organization" *is*.

    Start throwing the bosses of large, billion-dollar agricultural corporations in prison for racketeering. Oh, and have the local cops start going after people who hire illegal alien household servants, fry cooks, etc.

    You don't need new laws: you just need to start enforcing the laws you already have, with the goal that people will start - you know - obeying them. What a shame the USA has mostly destroyed its unions. A few teamsters fighting for their jobs would sort out the illegals.

    Absolutely, and not not just the ag biz. Start throwing the board members and c-suite occupiers into the slammer, not just the poor mopes in HR who actually sign the paper.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  130. res says:
    @Jack D
    I no longer remember the details of the kerfuffle but didn't Aaronson himself once get in big trouble with the PC Police for something that he said on his blog (that would have been innocuous in a sane society)? So once burned, twice shy. It's true that in our society they don't literally come and drag you away to the Gulag or torture you on the rack but what they do do is bad enough that I don't want it for myself, so I don't blame the man.

    Reading between the lines, he is pretty much saying that we are living through a period that is not unlike the Soviet purges. That in itself is a pretty heavy duty thing to say to those that are in charge now. Compare that to what Pikachu said about how many wonderful messages of support he's gotten from Google employees, both those who are fully down with the program and those who want to kiss his butt just so he will leave them alone. Compare to those brownshirts and brown-nosers, Aaronson is a hero just for writing this much. I am not in favor of ideological shit tests on the right - everyone should do what they are comfortable doing, publicly or privately. If you want to do more, to set yourself on fire in front of the Googleplex or whatever, then bully for you but don't tell me what to do.

    He did get in trouble, and IMHO it was even worse than the usual because he was attacked after posting something that was intensely personal. Amanda Marcotte had a “starring” role (searching for her name and Scott Aaronson’s will get more details). Here is Scott Alexander’s take for anyone who wants to revisit what happened: http://slatestarcodex.com/2015/01/01/untitled/

    It will be interesting to see if Aaronson gets any blowback from what he wrote this time.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  131. Bob Smith says:

    “What if the memo said that biological differences amongst Black, Hispanic, or LGBTQ employees explained their underrepresentation in tech and leadership roles? Would some people still be discussing the merit of the memo’s arguments or would there be a universal call for swift action against its author?”

    Only a progressive would posit that question. The rest of us would discuss the merit. If blacks are < 1% of Google employees, I would bet they're concentrated in HR and their diversity bureaucracy (as the women probably are). In the case of blacks, a combination of 85 average IQ and a standard deviation of only 10 IQ means that 3 standard deviations out is only 115 IQ. If blacks really were as smart as whites on average, as progressive orthodoxy claims, surely the billions of dollars we've spent on black-specific education programs trying to prove it would have borne fruit.

    That's less than 1 in 100 blacks scraping by with the bare minimum in a engineering organization like Google, and they're not going to compare well to 130 IQ/2 standard deviation whites. Indeed, if you do the math, that's 15 130 IQ whites in the general population for every 115 IQ black. So yeah, I'd expect just about zero blacks in coding positions, which is exactly what I've seen in every company I've worked for. None in coding positions, all of the black engineering staff (rare as they are) are in IT.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  132. @San Fernando Curt
    Try not to wet your panties. Trump's gambit puts pressure on China to rein in it's annoying little client to the South. North Korea is a chihuahua - bark big, bite lite. Since any hot war would explode on China's patio, NK will be frozen out - if something happens to us, China's economy will go 1929; we're it's biggest loan sucker. I'm glad the ers of suck-up foreign policy is over. For lack of a better term, revolution will do.

    No, you are an idiot. Probably you were waving your flag “U-S-A! U-S-A!” when Dubya started his idiotic war in Iraq. North Korea is not America’s business, it’s the Koreans’ business, and if the US doesn’t like a few Nork nukes (besides the hundreds of Chinese and thousands of Russian nukes) pointed at its cities, then they should just leave the peninsula, automatically making North Korea China’s problem.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Clyde
    North Korea is America's business because we have allies in that region that we do lots of crucial business with. Taiwan, Japan, S Korea. We also need them as production alternatives to Mainland China. Taiwan, Japan, S Korea know how to produce on their native soil plus they know how to set up shop (factories) and produce in low cost Thailand, Philippines, Vietnam etc. Thailand produced hard drives being a good example.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  133. Clyde says:
    @Eagle Eye

    Pichai then started off gathering opinions from his direct reports — such as
    1.[Youtube honchette Susan] Wojcicki [haven't we heard that last name somewhere?],
    2. HR head Eileen Naughton, ...
    3. communications head Jessica Powell ...
     
    In other words:
    1. Boss's sister-in-law/movie lady
    2. HR lady
    3. Press lady/spokeswoman.

    How much more stereotyped can one get? Shouldn't there be at least 50% men in these roles?

    Women dominating HR offices is one of the biggest corporate scams ever. And just plain stupid. You want to have a mix of clear thinking people selecting your new employees. And HR/Human Resources is another word I would pay millions to see get nuked out of existence. No way do Chinese, Japanese, Taiwanese, Koreans, Indians hire people via offices that are 85%+ female.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  134. Clyde says:
    @reiner Tor
    No, you are an idiot. Probably you were waving your flag "U-S-A! U-S-A!" when Dubya started his idiotic war in Iraq. North Korea is not America's business, it's the Koreans' business, and if the US doesn't like a few Nork nukes (besides the hundreds of Chinese and thousands of Russian nukes) pointed at its cities, then they should just leave the peninsula, automatically making North Korea China's problem.

    North Korea is America’s business because we have allies in that region that we do lots of crucial business with. Taiwan, Japan, S Korea. We also need them as production alternatives to Mainland China. Taiwan, Japan, S Korea know how to produce on their native soil plus they know how to set up shop (factories) and produce in low cost Thailand, Philippines, Vietnam etc. Thailand produced hard drives being a good example.

    Read More
    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    That's not America, that's your elites. They could actually bring back the production to America.

    Are you actually prepared to spill your (or your sons') blood so that your elites have alternative destinations to outsource your jobs?
    , @Clyde
    I get your Ron Paul, no-war libertarianism but we are in a tug of war with China and Russia. A game of regional and world dominance. If we withdraw fr NE Asia and chicken out they (China) take over. Nothing would delight the current Ming Dynasty more. The industrial and manufacturing supply chains are in Asia for many things America needs. You live in a small population European nation that does not have super power rivals. fwiw I have been in Pat Buchanan's camp since 1990. On trade and immigration. I have seen what he fought against and predicted come true.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  135. @Clyde
    North Korea is America's business because we have allies in that region that we do lots of crucial business with. Taiwan, Japan, S Korea. We also need them as production alternatives to Mainland China. Taiwan, Japan, S Korea know how to produce on their native soil plus they know how to set up shop (factories) and produce in low cost Thailand, Philippines, Vietnam etc. Thailand produced hard drives being a good example.

    That’s not America, that’s your elites. They could actually bring back the production to America.

    Are you actually prepared to spill your (or your sons’) blood so that your elites have alternative destinations to outsource your jobs?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  136. Clyde says:
    @Clyde
    North Korea is America's business because we have allies in that region that we do lots of crucial business with. Taiwan, Japan, S Korea. We also need them as production alternatives to Mainland China. Taiwan, Japan, S Korea know how to produce on their native soil plus they know how to set up shop (factories) and produce in low cost Thailand, Philippines, Vietnam etc. Thailand produced hard drives being a good example.

    I get your Ron Paul, no-war libertarianism but we are in a tug of war with China and Russia. A game of regional and world dominance. If we withdraw fr NE Asia and chicken out they (China) take over. Nothing would delight the current Ming Dynasty more. The industrial and manufacturing supply chains are in Asia for many things America needs. You live in a small population European nation that does not have super power rivals. fwiw I have been in Pat Buchanan’s camp since 1990. On trade and immigration. I have seen what he fought against and predicted come true.

    Read More
    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    The Russians asked years ago the US to delimit spheres of influence. The US and Western politicians in general have ever since not only flat out denied Russia's rights to such a sphere of influence, but claimed that such spheres of influence were obsolete. In essence, they declared the whole world to be a US sphere of influence, where the US had a right to meddle in any country in the world (including Russia and China, in both of which the not too secret aim of the US regime is a regime change), whereas countries like Russia or China never had such rights. To believe that either Russia or China would accept such a state of affairs is outright idiocy.

    So the US is aggressively aiming to expand its empire to eventually include the entire world. Such policy could only result in a catastrophe.

    The North Koreans would probably agree to the Russo-Chinese proposal to halt missile launches and nuclear tests in exchange for a stop of US-South Korean joint military exercises. But the US is unwilling to do that.

    By the way your idea of preventing China from becoming the dominant power of Asia is futile. The Philippines and Vietnam have just recently bent the knee over the South China Sea territorial disputes, where China is disregarding any reasonable interpretation of international law.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  137. @Clyde
    I get your Ron Paul, no-war libertarianism but we are in a tug of war with China and Russia. A game of regional and world dominance. If we withdraw fr NE Asia and chicken out they (China) take over. Nothing would delight the current Ming Dynasty more. The industrial and manufacturing supply chains are in Asia for many things America needs. You live in a small population European nation that does not have super power rivals. fwiw I have been in Pat Buchanan's camp since 1990. On trade and immigration. I have seen what he fought against and predicted come true.

    The Russians asked years ago the US to delimit spheres of influence. The US and Western politicians in general have ever since not only flat out denied Russia’s rights to such a sphere of influence, but claimed that such spheres of influence were obsolete. In essence, they declared the whole world to be a US sphere of influence, where the US had a right to meddle in any country in the world (including Russia and China, in both of which the not too secret aim of the US regime is a regime change), whereas countries like Russia or China never had such rights. To believe that either Russia or China would accept such a state of affairs is outright idiocy.

    So the US is aggressively aiming to expand its empire to eventually include the entire world. Such policy could only result in a catastrophe.

    The North Koreans would probably agree to the Russo-Chinese proposal to halt missile launches and nuclear tests in exchange for a stop of US-South Korean joint military exercises. But the US is unwilling to do that.

    By the way your idea of preventing China from becoming the dominant power of Asia is futile. The Philippines and Vietnam have just recently bent the knee over the South China Sea territorial disputes, where China is disregarding any reasonable interpretation of international law.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Clyde
    I don't mind Putin and Russia, our policies against them have been warped. Blame Hillary, the Democrat party and the State Department who hate a bold, high-T, unapologetic white leader. I do mind the Chinese. I don't want to see a Chinese dominated world. There are 1.6 billion of them. And their leaders are not stupid or cucks.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  138. Clyde says:
    @reiner Tor
    The Russians asked years ago the US to delimit spheres of influence. The US and Western politicians in general have ever since not only flat out denied Russia's rights to such a sphere of influence, but claimed that such spheres of influence were obsolete. In essence, they declared the whole world to be a US sphere of influence, where the US had a right to meddle in any country in the world (including Russia and China, in both of which the not too secret aim of the US regime is a regime change), whereas countries like Russia or China never had such rights. To believe that either Russia or China would accept such a state of affairs is outright idiocy.

    So the US is aggressively aiming to expand its empire to eventually include the entire world. Such policy could only result in a catastrophe.

    The North Koreans would probably agree to the Russo-Chinese proposal to halt missile launches and nuclear tests in exchange for a stop of US-South Korean joint military exercises. But the US is unwilling to do that.

    By the way your idea of preventing China from becoming the dominant power of Asia is futile. The Philippines and Vietnam have just recently bent the knee over the South China Sea territorial disputes, where China is disregarding any reasonable interpretation of international law.

    I don’t mind Putin and Russia, our policies against them have been warped. Blame Hillary, the Democrat party and the State Department who hate a bold, high-T, unapologetic white leader. I do mind the Chinese. I don’t want to see a Chinese dominated world. There are 1.6 billion of them. And their leaders are not stupid or cucks.

    Read More
    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    Well, if you don't like a Chinese dominated world, you should work on strengthening Europe and the US. If you cannot stop third world immigration to these regions, then a Chinese dominated world is all but inevitable anyway. You shouldn't start wars in China's backyard to stop that from happening, this is just extremely stupid. Basically because your country is in terminal decline (because of mass immigration, also a bit because of the idiotic LGBTQ etc. idiocy, and affirmative action), you now seem to be prepared to provoke a nuclear war to arrest the relative decline of your country. Sad!
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  139. @Clyde
    I don't mind Putin and Russia, our policies against them have been warped. Blame Hillary, the Democrat party and the State Department who hate a bold, high-T, unapologetic white leader. I do mind the Chinese. I don't want to see a Chinese dominated world. There are 1.6 billion of them. And their leaders are not stupid or cucks.

    Well, if you don’t like a Chinese dominated world, you should work on strengthening Europe and the US. If you cannot stop third world immigration to these regions, then a Chinese dominated world is all but inevitable anyway. You shouldn’t start wars in China’s backyard to stop that from happening, this is just extremely stupid. Basically because your country is in terminal decline (because of mass immigration, also a bit because of the idiotic LGBTQ etc. idiocy, and affirmative action), you now seem to be prepared to provoke a nuclear war to arrest the relative decline of your country. Sad!

    Read More
    • Replies: @Clyde
    The USA is a large and easy target for you and others because we are a super power that feels compelled to act same as USSR and China. Nature abhors a vacuum thus China and Russia will love to fill what we vacate. Same for Iran. Iran's long term goal is to turn the Sunni Arab nations into Shiite Arab nations.
    US foreign policy under Obama/Hillary/Kerry was terminally stupid. They destroyed Libya - Syria which lead to the Muslim and sub-Saharan African invasion of Europe. It is better under Trump plus he has cut illegal immigration in half just by taking office and scaring them away.

    So how is your nation doing? In your humble opinion of course.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  140. Clyde says:
    @reiner Tor
    Well, if you don't like a Chinese dominated world, you should work on strengthening Europe and the US. If you cannot stop third world immigration to these regions, then a Chinese dominated world is all but inevitable anyway. You shouldn't start wars in China's backyard to stop that from happening, this is just extremely stupid. Basically because your country is in terminal decline (because of mass immigration, also a bit because of the idiotic LGBTQ etc. idiocy, and affirmative action), you now seem to be prepared to provoke a nuclear war to arrest the relative decline of your country. Sad!

    The USA is a large and easy target for you and others because we are a super power that feels compelled to act same as USSR and China. Nature abhors a vacuum thus China and Russia will love to fill what we vacate. Same for Iran. Iran’s long term goal is to turn the Sunni Arab nations into Shiite Arab nations.
    US foreign policy under Obama/Hillary/Kerry was terminally stupid. They destroyed Libya – Syria which lead to the Muslim and sub-Saharan African invasion of Europe. It is better under Trump plus he has cut illegal immigration in half just by taking office and scaring them away.

    So how is your nation doing? In your humble opinion of course.

    Read More
    • Replies: @reiner Tor

    Iran’s long term goal is to turn the Sunni Arab nations into Shiite Arab nations.
     
    And their even longer term goal is World Domination.

    So how is your nation doing? In your humble opinion of course.
     
    Very badly. It's a small nation, having lost most of its territory and glory in the past century (and some even earlier, our heyday was sometime in the High and Late Middle Ages perhaps 1000-1526, when we were a mid-sized Central European power), with the same terminal decline as yours.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  141. @Clyde
    The USA is a large and easy target for you and others because we are a super power that feels compelled to act same as USSR and China. Nature abhors a vacuum thus China and Russia will love to fill what we vacate. Same for Iran. Iran's long term goal is to turn the Sunni Arab nations into Shiite Arab nations.
    US foreign policy under Obama/Hillary/Kerry was terminally stupid. They destroyed Libya - Syria which lead to the Muslim and sub-Saharan African invasion of Europe. It is better under Trump plus he has cut illegal immigration in half just by taking office and scaring them away.

    So how is your nation doing? In your humble opinion of course.

    Iran’s long term goal is to turn the Sunni Arab nations into Shiite Arab nations.

    And their even longer term goal is World Domination.

    So how is your nation doing? In your humble opinion of course.

    Very badly. It’s a small nation, having lost most of its territory and glory in the past century (and some even earlier, our heyday was sometime in the High and Late Middle Ages perhaps 1000-1526, when we were a mid-sized Central European power), with the same terminal decline as yours.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Clyde
    Remain in light my friend, you know your history and where the bodies (literally) are buried ..... I say this based on your posts here at unz
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  142. Clyde says:
    @reiner Tor

    Iran’s long term goal is to turn the Sunni Arab nations into Shiite Arab nations.
     
    And their even longer term goal is World Domination.

    So how is your nation doing? In your humble opinion of course.
     
    Very badly. It's a small nation, having lost most of its territory and glory in the past century (and some even earlier, our heyday was sometime in the High and Late Middle Ages perhaps 1000-1526, when we were a mid-sized Central European power), with the same terminal decline as yours.

    Remain in light my friend, you know your history and where the bodies (literally) are buried ….. I say this based on your posts here at unz

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS
PastClassics
The “war hero” candidate buried information about POWs left behind in Vietnam.
What Was John McCain's True Wartime Record in Vietnam?
The evidence is clear — but often ignored
Are elite university admissions based on meritocracy and diversity as claimed?
A simple remedy for income stagnation