
Outrage over Google memo goes too far - valentinebm
http://edition.cnn.com/2017/08/07/opinions/google-employee-manifesto-against-diversity-opinion-randazza/index.html
======
imartin2k
"To me, if you read it and are completely outraged or uniformly in favor, then
you are part of the problem. If you can read anyone's opinion, spread out over
10 pages, and find nothing with which you agree, then you're almost certainly
not thinking. Similarly, if you can read this guy's entire memo and find
yourself blindly nodding, then you probably aren't using your brain either."

This.

~~~
AstralStorm
Come on, that's a "we have something for everyone" demagogue trick that is
despicable on its own due to its false premise.

(Ah right, a Barnum statement.)

~~~
imartin2k
I guess there is no perfect framework anyway. But some are better than others.

------
cm2187
It's funny, reading this column, I can't help thinking of this as a new form
of McCarthyism, where if you were seen to be a communist sympathiser, you
would be fired and prevented from finding another job in the industry.

~~~
gizmo686
Yes, the article makes that exact comparison.

~~~
cm2187
The irony being that the persecutors (liberals) today were the very victims
then.

~~~
bartof303
The true irony is that there is no actual persecution.

~~~
tedivm
Yeah, this guy who lost his job has already gotten new offers. This is even
considering that this whole incident brought to light the fact that he lied
about getting a PhD from Harvard, which is itself grounds for firing the guy.

------
vim_wannabe
Took me about two minutes to find out who might be manufacturing this outrage:
[https://twitter.com/CNN/status/894973242984759297](https://twitter.com/CNN/status/894973242984759297)

~~~
home_boi
That's funny although news outlets can have writers and reporters with
different opinions

~~~
vim_wannabe
People being fine with news outlets reporting opinions makes me sad.

~~~
girzel
Don't be sad, just learn how the news works.

------
PeterStuer
Two populations can have the same median and average score on fit for a
criterion. However, if they have a different distribution, let's say
population A has a 'normal' distribution while population B has a U-Shaped
distribution, then after the application of a high pass filter with a cutout
above the shared median, you will be left with proportionally higher residue
of population B than of population A and unbiased sampling of the result will
reflect this. Applying a high-pass filter below the median will show an
inverse result. A high-pass filter with cut-off at the median will result in a
50/50 result between A and B remainders. As always, statistics do not say
anything about any individual in any of the populations. Statistics does also
not address the potential underlying causes of the distribution differences.
Using statistical arguments to judge individuals is usually referred to as
prejudice or discrimination. Many countries have adopted laws and regulations
to curb some select forms of discrimination, while permitting others. In the
scenario where a high-pass filter far above the median is applied, while at
the same time a 50/50 distribution of the outcome is targeted, the observation
that, regardless of the mechanisms employed, members of B are actively
discriminated against would be correct. Whether that discrimination is
desirable or not is debatable. How distributions are realy shaped to a
criterion is measurable in theory, but in reality prone to biases especially
in highly 'politicized' environments.

------
gregatragenet3
meta - can we avoid linking through to sites with autoplay video?

