
Infamous Google memo author shot down by federal labor board - s73v3r_
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2018/02/federal-labor-board-google-was-justified-in-firing-engineer-behind-gender-memo/
======
s73v3r_
Just a reminder that, by now, we've all had a chance to read the memo. Saying
that someone "clearly didn't read it" because their interpretation differs
from yours is only going to serve to shoot down discussion.

~~~
bmer
His point might have been better taken if:

1) he didn't inundate it with criticism of communism (I used to be communist,
but the hero-worship pissed me off, and I no longer consider myself one:
suffice it to say that there are some really good critiques of communism, and
his are outdated and poor);

2) but point 1 is only problematic because caring for everyone if it is termed
"socialism", and "socialism" is linked directly to "communism" (which is in
itself problematic);

3) given point 2, it is difficult to understand his intentions, especially
given the current political climate, where racists use a wide variety of
euphemismistic labels (including "classical liberal", no offense meant to
classical liberalism) to console their conscience, and those of others;

4) related to point 3, "scientific" racism and discrimination is on the rise
---suffice it to say that anyone who makes any claim that "science says THIS",
without acknowledging that genetics, human psychology and social science are
frankly in their infancy, compared to the strongholds such as physics. That
isn't to say that scientists can't make claims, it's just that scientists tend
to make claims that are a lot more careful and aware of caveats, than
"scientific racists" are. A good example is genetics, where most people tend
to ignore the vast amount of mud progress in epigenetics (especially
spectacular in the last decade) throws on simple "gene X, thus phenotype Y"
type arguments. Let alone "women are more prone to anxiety".

5) given 4, it's especially worrisome that he actually puts value in IQ as a
measurable thing. Most tellingly, even if he assumes IQ is measurable, he
importantly doesn't realize that it is not static, and thus, not really usable
in the arguments he is trying to make.

The one thing that he brought to the table which WAS valuable is calling out
large corps/governments on only making very shallow changes (i.e. only in
outward appearance) to combat discrimination. Just like many other issues
(take environmentalism and green-washing), racism/discrimination/sexism has
become a "brand" thing: orgs like to wash themselves in various colours
(whether green, pink, or whatever), while making the least effort possible
towards actually fixing issues.

The sad thing is that this valid point was lost under the burden of whole
bunch of crap.

------
chmaynard
Employment law favors the employer unless the employee has a written contract
that spells out explicitly the terms of both employment and separation.
Executives know this and would never work without a written contract. The rest
of us are stupid.

