RACISTS AND SEXISTS BTFO

RACISTS AND SEXISTS BTFO

bbc.co.uk/news/technology-40859004

Other urls found in this thread:

twitter.com/NPR/status/894711002964660224
twitter.com/getongab/status/893975352804028417
documentcloud.org/documents/3914586-Googles-Ideological-Echo-Chamber.html
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

>be racist and sexist
>work at Google in the first place
Why? Sounds like he was looking for trouble all along.

...

poor moot
cant catch a break

>phone posting

but google is racist and sexist too

What did he write that was racist?

What did he even write that was sexist considering the paper was divided into "here's what women tend to be better at than men" and "here's what men tend to be better at than women"

Provide the most offensive, hateful quotes that warranted his firing

>acknowledging biological differences in 2017 is both 'racist' and 'sexist'
the absoulte state of U-S-and-A

Kys lefty-shill

he said anything bad about women, that is sexist

I've stopped using Google now

Hating phoneposting is leftist now?

lmao, how 12 are you right now?

Repeat after me - A-U-T-I-S-M

>the absoulte state of U-S-and-A
He didn't "acknowledge biological differences in 2017", he dropped a document on the intranet claiming that Google was led by incompetent ideologists who lived by a flawed philosophy since women can't into tech

Have a bump

it's not hard.

STOP USING GOOGLE YOU FUCKS

even Bing does less damage. There are plenty of other search engines out there and at this point they all perform the fucking same.

You win this fight by throwing unfavorable adjectives around.

We have the same millenial babbies now on Sup Forums who pretend everything is Sup Forums what they don't like. You don't need arguments, just labels.

>le summerfags
Take your entry level Sup Forums memes and leave our board.

Black user here.
You know the drill.

PhD in Biology? Capable of sifting through bullshit and penning out root cause analysis? Sounds like quality engineer to me... If I was the CEO there, I'd have called him in to have a chat and to hear him out. Funny the kind of backsliding that happens at a company that forget to do this.

He's a rarity in the valley. As he'll likely be blacklisted from the fucbois on the block, I'll be reaching out to him in the future. There's a place being resurrected for people like him.

look all these comment
twitter.com/NPR/status/894711002964660224

Sooo....he was right?

>summerposting

>b-b-back to your containment board

Are you even trying, kiddo?

>shitposting

google are a bunch of retards more news at 11

Nigger

BASED BLACK MEAN
Maga!
Shaliday!

He also talked about how letting some ethnic minorities into Google in the long run would also damage the company

He didn't, you and most everyone else missed the point because you proved his point. His point was that in today's PC culture you can't have an honest and open conversation about diversity because any attempt to have a debate is immediately shut down by claiming the opponent is sexist. He also rightfully points out that white makes are being discriminated against because they are not allowed in these accelerator programs exclusively for females and minorities.

Also, the guy has a phd in biology and is qualified to speak on the subject of population distribution of personality traits as it related to the workforce. He's not saying all women are inferior leaders and engineers, he's saying less of a percentage are than men. There are still plenty of men who are shit leaders and shit engineers too.

>can't into
>>>/9gag/

>bing
Most devs are pooinloos

Good riddance. 9 times out of 10 these sexist dinosaurs are white, male and borderline autistic.

It's a shame they also tend to be quite smart, but if someone has toxic views it's best to just hire 10 less competent people to replace them. Sure, it'd be more expensive but you avoid these PR nightmares.

On the plus side, hopefully any other dinosaurs at google learn to keep their Sup Forums-tier garbage to themselves.

Why the fuck do "Women and Minorities" quotas even exist?
If they're good, they don't need quotas in the first place.

>His point was that in today's PC culture you can't have an honest and open conversation about diversity because any attempt to have a debate is immediately shut down by claiming the opponent is sexist.
Cry more, no one cares. There's an arena for everything, and your company's intranet is not one of them.

>the guy has a phd in biology
Kek, explains why he had an entry level tech job.

>is qualified to speak on subject of population distribution of personality traits as it related to the workforce
First of all, he's not an anthropologist. Secondly, he isn't even that type of biologist, he studied microbiology for fuck's sake and his dissertation was on symbiotic microbes.

>If they're good, they don't need quotas in the first place.
/story

>this kills the tech industry
And the sad thing is, when it dies, you'll be blaming everyone but yourselves for your own stupidity. This is just how women behave and have always behaved across all cultures.

Feels are more important than reals you bigot!

> 9 times out of 10 these sexist dinosaurs are white, male and borderline autistic.
I want to disagree with you, but I can't. Women can be unfit for stressful jobs during their periods, but it applies only to some of them. Others can program if they want it.

You didn't provide a single counter-point to any of the guy's claims.

I don't have to either, user claims the retard has a right to voice his opinion, I'm saying that dumping a document on your company's intranet insulting a large group of your coworkers is going to get you fired in any reality.

Huh? You know Sup Forums was created as a left wing haven, right?

>sandeep is immune to progressiv-

He tried to sugarcoat it but come on, you can't deny that he's a racist and sexist.

>insulting
Where's the insults? What's the most insulting line from the manifesto?

wow a black man! How big is your benis?

Yes I can. You can't claim he's racist until you post passages from what he wrote that make it clear that he is.

>Where's the insults? What's the most insulting line from the manifesto?
Learn how to read between the lines, he's basically saying that Google's hiring strategies are stupid because women in general don't really make good engineers, thus implying that female engineers already working at Google got hired because of a hiring policy rather than, you know, their actual skills.

This guy was a retard so they're not losing anything, I mean what did he expect when his boss is a poo in loo?

at least there's a new job waiting for him

twitter.com/getongab/status/893975352804028417

He wanted to get fired, clearly. Not as if he's dumb enough to think that there's be no serious repercussions from a company like Google for this. Maybe to get out for some reason and maybe to try suing for wrongful termination.

Where should racists and sexists work? They get insulted for being NEETs.

I see. The paper becomes offensive once you read what you imagine that it says instead of what's actually printed? This explains a lot.

>insulting a large group of your coworkers
Source, please.

This, he made no racist or sexist remarks. His point is proven, most people can't handle this discussion without emotional bias, so it creates the echo chamber.

>write a fairly reasonable memo calling for substantial discussion on a hypothesis that gender gap in tech might be caused, at least partially, by factors others than sexism, misogyny and discrimination. Include a disclaimer recognizing these do exist and are bad.
>get fired for "sexism and misogyny"
>sue
>settle for $BIGNUM
>PROFIT!

Might've been his plan all along.

nigger

I just finished reading the memo and the way the left has been reacting to it is completely ridiculous. If that's all it takes to get fired then we're in a lot of fucking trouble because it's essentially 75% opinions backed with biological and cognitive science studies and 25% nonretarded suggestions on how to actually increase the number of women in the workplace. I don't think anyone on the left has read it, it's like somebody only read the first few pages, declared it racist, so everybody else on their side of the political; spectrum chose to disregard it, content to perpetuate the "racist sexist" label. That's exactly how cults train their members to act towards dissenting opinions.

I don't think you read the whole paper. He's claiming that google lowers its hiring standards to try to bridge the diversity gap which is bad for everyone. He's not saying don't hire women, he's saying apply the same level of scrutiny for women as men. He's arguing for true equality.

He's probably right if he was talking about hiring them just to fill a quota.

If they're actually qualified for the positions they're hired for then there shouldn't be a problem.

Macfag

No he didn't

>hurr durr it's only imagined
No, it's very real. If I say that the only reason you have a job and an education is because you enjoy white privilege, are you saying that's
somehow NOT insulting to you and your accomplishments?

You're a literal retard.

He has no proof of actual lowering of standards, which means that he literally thinks that many female engineers have less competence than their male counterparts.

God damn the OP of the paper was so right about the moral bias echo chamber, even on Sup Forums there are people claiming he's sexist and racist. Read the fucking paper, word for word, don't assume he's implying anything, read it literally.

documentcloud.org/documents/3914586-Googles-Ideological-Echo-Chamber.html

lel

>you saying that's
>somehow NOT insulting to you and your accomplishments
No, I'm saying that's not true, in fact, that's a big lie.

you will never work for google you racist sexist piece of shit

Leave, go back never return.

I don't even want to, faggot

but most aren´t and the reality that follows out of it is simply something that people can´t accept

And the claim that Google is lowering their standards in order to be more diverse, is also a big lie.

upvoted :^)

Gaymer cuck

Welcome to the new world. Nobody actually reads anything past the headline or the first two sentences of an article. Twitter and fagbook really did a number on peoples attention spans and literacy.

Even here I see people making shit up, claiming that he said they shouldn't have hired black and other stupid shit. The left is relying on people not actually reading the memo.

>expecting ideological retards to actually read something instead of just believing their biased networks

It doesn't matter what autists here think, it matters what his coworkers think, if they think he's racist/sexist no one will want to work with him.

Pajeet was right to fire him.

That's not what he said at all. He said women are biologically less inclined to go into tech areas. This isn't an insult, he didn't say they were dumber. And biologically means on average, it does not mean all women.

>His point was that in today's PC culture you can't have an honest and open conversation about diversity because any attempt to have a debate is immediately shut down by claiming the opponent is sexist.
There's a difference between "an open conversation," and "declaring your racist and sexist beliefs to be the One Truth." He didn't want to listen, he just wanted to spout his self-serving propaganda which he didn't even think to question. "I'm a white male and my brain shat out a conclusion, so it's undeniably right and everyone else is wrong."

He questioned the narrative and got unpersoned. Watch out, YOU COULD BE NEXT.

Oppose SJWism where ever you can.
Don't be bullied into silence.

He even pointed out that it was averages across the population and that it doesn't mean women are less qualified than men. It does mean a higher percentage of men will be qualified than women, just the same as you don't see women hanging drywall.

>declaring your racist and sexist beliefs to be the One Truth.

Provide an example of this in the memo

>"I'm a white male and my brain shat out a conclusion, so it's undeniably right and everyone else is wrong."

Did you miss the part where he openly acknowledged his own bias?

>claiming characteristics of the average woman
>doesn't cite studies

Please point out specific passages where he is wrong.

Please leave this website. I want to physically harm you, you fucking shitface.

Nice bait, here's (you).

Page 8 paragraph 2 for instance.

He did, kikemodo just removed them in their scoop, lol.

>Learn how to read between the lines
>it was real in my mind

Someone against this paper actually prove to me that he's wrong. Oh wait no one against the paper read the whole thing without immediate bias. Point out where and why he's wrong.

>I don't understand context
Maximum autism

>it's essentially 75% opinions backed with biological and cognitive science studies
The problem is it's not demanded by the totality of the evidence. He didn't look at the evidence, formulate a theory, attempt to disprove it, and fail; he formulated a theory that served his white male identity and then cherry-picked evidence which confirmed it.

>Women and blacks are intellectual inferior
Totally not true
>Then drop all racial and female privileges and easy jobs
Lot that is racism we need easy way
>Why women only want to change sex distribution in tech and not on mining, plumbing and sewage works
You are sexist

He claims this and that characteristics of the average man and woman, such as women being more attracted to people and aesthetics, but he does not actually cite anything proving those claims. He might as well be pulling it out from his ass.

Tumblr pls leave

Honestly fuck off. I've read all the document, could not find a single piece of "le discrimination" it was a clean document, open to argumentation, it has data backing up his argument. This is another case when indoctrinated people blow things out of proportion, and the irony is that google's own bias worked again a paper against that same bias.

>post pointless ideological manifesto under his own name
>get fired
>blacklisted from working in most of the industry for life

Lol, what a dumb nigger. If you're going to destroy your career, at least accomplish something meaningful while doing so.

He cited many sources but gizmodo removed them. The original paper has sources, but I'll have to check if he sourced something for those specific claims.

you aren't in charge of determining the context, all I see is a guy who wrote a reasonable letter and was doxxed for it

My main problem with his paper is that I agree with it almost completely.
This likely means that I share biases with him and I am agreeing because he thinks the same way I do, rather than agreeing with him because he has convinced me that his arguments make sense.

Ironically he says the same thing about the echo chamber and confirmation bias.

>he formulated a theory that served his white male identity and then cherry-picked evidence which confirmed it.

should be easy to counter then, so where is it?