Reply to post: Re: This Article

Your top five dreadful people the Google manifesto has pulled out of the woodwork

kierenmccarthy

Re: This Article

This is a pretty reasonable attack job.

I did have several paragraphs explaining why Damore was wrong but the article was getting too long and I pulled them out while failing to kill the preceding line. So you're right there.

I could have, should have, gone more into why group comparison in this case was entirely the wrong approach and why it ended up being incredibly offensive.

You are however wrong about Google and hiring. I doubt whether you live in the Bay Area And I doubt you know many people that work at Google or have applied for jobs at Google. I do and I have. Admittedly, their hiring process is a little odd but the reality is that they have their pick of the very best candidates. If someone is being interviewed for a software engineering job there, they are fully qualified to do it.

Even accounting for the fact that there are far fewer women and non white men who have the requisite skills, Google maintains a huge white, male bias and articles like Damore's indicate why. Perple end up getting the job or not getting the job based on what the interviewers think of them because the skill level is consistently high and they all are qualified.

That's why this doc hit such a nerve at Google: it confirmed what many suspected. That despite their best efforts white males continued to get most of the jobs because they were white males being interviewed by white males. Damore's hokum piece of self justification was a lightning rod for people incredibly frustrated by the situation.

All that said, this article was about calling out the people that showed themselves to be dreadful people in response this one issue in this one company.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019