Skip to main content


 
Not even the quoted science is holding up in the #GoogleManifesto, as completely expected.
IMHO it's not just important to understand that the Google memo was gargabe. The key is why:

What do scientists think about the biological claims made in the document about diversity written by a Google employee in August 2017? - Quora

What do scientists think about the biological claims made in the document about diversity written by a Google employee in August 2017? - Quora


 
Welp, I lied about not talking about the #GoogleManifesto anymore. The fact is it didn't merely "cite evidence from behavioral sciences".
If you have to fear for your job for simply citing some evidence from the behavioural sciences something is really badly wrong
News flash: you can do everything in accordance with "science" and still suffer. It's called being "dead right." Happens all the time.

I don't get it, science never says what to do?

Here's the rest of the thread since it doesn't sync with Friendica:

The manifesto is highly political, citing biases, oppression, "echo chamber", authoritarianism. Science quotes are only there in support.

Now it's convenient to reduce all political disagreements with the manifesto to refusing science, but it's also highly dishonest and wrong.

And yes, you can be fired for expressing political views through your company's communication means, especially going against the law.

California has the most comprehensive anti-discrimination laws, so even if Google wanted to favor hiring men in Mountain View they legally couldn't.



 
This is the first and the last time you'll hear from me about the #GoogleManifesto, this thread has everything you need to know about it.
Much excellent #GoogleManifesto coverage, but one major aspect has been mostly ignored: history COMPLETELY disagrees with GoogleBro. 1/15