Hacker News Reader

Comment by someguydave | Hacker News Reader

>It's intellectually stifling, and I'm no longer interested in enabling people who use that kind of rhetoric.

Not only is it stifling, it is tearing our society apart. If a person believes one of these "forbidden hypotheses" they sudden find themselves to be the target of irrational hatred and hostile actions.

Everyone must understand that demonizing people creates demons who may one day seek violent revenge.

View on HN

> violent revenge

If not violent, we're creating the next generation of bigots.

The current people identifying with James Damore (=men who were promised they would be selected on skills) are as young as 15 years old. Do we expect them to be inclusive during the remaining 45 years before their retirement?

I don't even understand how I should adapt my expectations for career. If competence isn't the criteria anymore, what is, then? Do opportunities now depend on our ethnicity, gender and religion? "Sorry, we know the situation is unfair for males, we're only looking for males who don't mind never being promoted and who know how to shut up." Should I choose an education based on the male/female balance in that sector? In which direction should a white male adapt?

Accomplished Diplomacy is the skill of choice. If you can manipulate all those political warriors and fanatics to support propelling you on - against there own interests, you may have a career still.

Think of it, less like a race of skilled people- and more, like rising through the ranks of a political party.

But I chose computers because I like clear cut solutions and the lack of bullshit......

The fundamental problem is- you where to succesfull. Society moved into your flat, and with society came the priest-caste and the various lords of various thiefdoms.

Competence was never the criteria for success in tech. At least as long as I've been around, so maybe we'll say certainly not in the 21st century. It's all about being male, preferably white, with a piece of paper from a good school that knows the right words to beat the culture fit.

So far in my career the only people I've see wax poetic about competence are the incompetent ones desperately stroking their own egos.

> "demonizing people creates demons"

I had exactly the same impression with racism a couple decades ago in France: I met a few young guys saying on purpose a lot of racist clichés. I do not think they were really racists, just fed up with the hardcore demonization we had then.

By for some topics such as racism, I'm under the impression that the demonizing pressure is a bit lower than before, at least in France. So there is hope.

For what's happening in the US, it seems to be very frightening -- this guy has been fired for talking about some hypothesis! I wonder why the pressure is so high. Maybe because the "deep american society" remains much more sexist than in Europe, thus justifying a much stronger defense from feminists?

Also, “Google memo” threads seem to be buried very quickly on HN, which is the only place I imagine where this discussion can be held between consenting adults, how come?

The flamewar detector and flags from people who are fed up with the constant barrage of threads about the same topic. The threads about widespread sexism at Uber were treated similarly.

It'd be great if you yuropoors would just stop jumping to the conclusion that you're better than us as your default reaction.

> Maybe because the "deep american society" remains much more sexist than in Europe, thus justifying a much stronger defense from feminists?

No my theory is that the USA is the home of these hyperleftist utopians. The US installed these uptopians as rulers in Europe after WWII.

The host always has the most immunity to the disease. The strongest critics and detractors of the uptopians also live in the US, and they are more visible as TV and movie villians in US media.

Biology isn't a simple 1-to-1 match. Nor is it merely an n-to-m mach either. Biology is really, really messy. Whether it's secondary and primary sexual traits or the color of your eyes it's mostly a statistically driven result and not one driven by a deterministic engine. DNA for all of its structure doesn't seem to give way to an easily structured expression of genes. I think this is the critical thing lost on folks (it was lost on me for years) because we're always working with something that seems very regular and systematic but when you break it down into smaller components it becomes clear how little of that is regular and systematic. So, to say that biology magically creates our minds as a whole or even in part doesn't work out. I'm not arguing for dualism but I am arguing that biology isn't so easy to model. And that we should, James Damore included, accept that our conclusions are easily overturned when we dig a bit deeper.

> they sudden find themselves to be the target of irrational hatred and hostile actions.

So who exactly is being doxxed and threatened over this? Who is doing the doxxing and threatening? Yes, the debate is being stifled by hatred and hostile actions. We should all oppose that, but some seem to be withholding their condemnation because the results suit them.

James Damore was summarily fired for honestly writing about the problems he saw with Google's personnel policies, backed with evidence. That is pretty threatening in my book.

If society is being torn apart, then the era of peak togetherness was vanishingly small. I mean, we had our first non-white male president less than a decade ago. That's a really hyperbolic sentiment when a lot of sizable minorities have never or only very recently felt resonably included in society.

What does any of that have to do with the demonization of people who summarize empirical evidence about psychology and human behavior?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com