It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Google Employee's Anti-Diversity Manifesto Goes 'Internally Viral' - LiveLeak Video shows Proof Goog

page: 3
38
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 6 2017 @ 03:05 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 




posted on Aug, 6 2017 @ 03:06 AM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: ChaoticOrder
From what I can see most Google employees disagreed with the memo and made tweets disavowing it... which is totally expected. That does not mean however the author of the document had no valid point. The fact they would disavow a document calling for more ideological diversity in Google is highly ironic considering their love for diversity. It just proves his point. I guess diversity and freedom of thought is great until it messes with your agenda.


Is there something against diversity in NOT AGREEING with someone else's opinion?

How so?



Of course! Everything is wrong with 'diversity' because is doesn't operate on the basis of the most competent being selected and rewarded.

If you're building a rocket, you don't pick someone to build it merely because they're muslim or female. You choose the most qualified and experienced. If they happen to be white and male, so be it. If they are a muslim, black, female or anything at all - so be it.

Diversity for the sake of it is absurd and dangerous.


(post by Outlier13 removed for a manners violation)

posted on Aug, 6 2017 @ 03:08 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 


(post by GusMcDangerthing removed for a manners violation)

posted on Aug, 6 2017 @ 03:13 AM
link   

originally posted by: GusMcDangerthing

Diversity for the sake of it is absurd and dangerous.



Still merely an opinion, but one I don't disagree with entirely. Attention must be paid to a balance of all things ... talent, ability, experience, and personal qualities.

However, nothing presented here proves that "diversity" means simply "hiring women and racial minorities" ... or anything else. This is a fact free topic.



posted on Aug, 6 2017 @ 03:16 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Aug, 6 2017 @ 03:17 AM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: GusMcDangerthing

Diversity for the sake of it is absurd and dangerous.



Still merely an opinion, but one I don't disagree with entirely. Attention must be paid to a balance of all things ... talent, ability, experience, and personal qualities.

However, nothing presented here proves that "diversity" means simply "hiring women and racial minorities" ... or anything else. This is a fact free topic.


Are you saying you believe the opposite to what I stated? That goes to say a huge amount about your poor character. Big surprise.


(post by GusMcDangerthing removed for a manners violation)

posted on Aug, 6 2017 @ 03:26 AM
link   

originally posted by: Elton

originally posted by: Outlier13
a reply to: Gryphon66

Next time watch the video posted which correlates directly to the article's primary point before pretending you understand.



Not available through the work firewall. You ought to summarize topics rather than link to videos to make your point for you...

Having FW issues at work? If IT hasn't blocked DDNS you could setup a home SSH server and port forward 3389 (assuming you use Windows) in the tunnel.




posted on Aug, 6 2017 @ 03:32 AM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
Is there something against diversity in NOT AGREEING with someone else's opinion?

I don't recall saying that. Google is clearly breeding a certain type of culture within their business and that is now extremely apparent by looking at their attempts to censor certain view points over the last few months. When this is called into question by one of their employees he is criticized by other employees for being a "privileged white male".



posted on Aug, 6 2017 @ 03:43 AM
link   

originally posted by: ChaoticOrder

originally posted by: Gryphon66
Is there something against diversity in NOT AGREEING with someone else's opinion?

I don't recall saying that. Google is clearly breeding a certain type of culture within their business and that is now extremely apparent by looking at their attempts to censor certain view points over the last few months. When this is called into question by one of their employees he is criticized by other employees for being a "privileged white male".


That's why I phrased my post as a question. Doesn't every corporation "breed" a certain type of culture for their business?

The Google doc manifesto, based on what is available, goes far beyond simply "calling attempts to censor" into question.

There have been accusations of censoring by Google... but there are literally MILLIONS of Google searches a day, right?

Do you have data on how many of those are censored and why? Any search I've done pulls up a range of results, many of which are right out of major conservative news and opinion outlets, so I can only go on what I've experienced. Have you experienced censorship?

The guy was criticized by other Google employees for his stated opinions about other people, not about Google per se as far as I can tell. As you noted, it's all opinions, not necessarily facts.



posted on Aug, 6 2017 @ 04:04 AM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66


Have you experienced censorship?

Of course I have, I've seen comments disappear, I've seen whole channels disappear, it has been discussed a lot recently in many different places. Even the OP's videos gives lots of evidence of this censorship. And now YouTube has just come out with a new AI driven censorship program to combat "controversial" religious and political videos, disabling comments, disabling likes, demonetizing them, removing them from suggested videos, not showing them in searches, etc. This is clearly a stepping up of their censorship efforts and I find it quite concerning. But they are a private business and they can what they want at the end of the day. Ultimately it will just lead to the collapse of their platform... before long we'll see completely decentralized video sharing platforms where nothing can be censored.
edit on 6/8/2017 by ChaoticOrder because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 6 2017 @ 04:44 AM
link   
Just read the full memo and I would say he focuses a bit too much on the issue of sexism... but fundamentally I think what he's saying is valid for the most part. Women will naturally be less attracted to certain jobs and more attracted to others. It's just why more hair dressers are women and why more men are construction workers, there's nothing morally wrong with that, why do men and women need to be exactly the same? Do we really want to evolve into a sexless species where we all look the same? Agghhh... I find that thought absolutely repulsive.

The writer of the memo states "At Google, we’re regularly told that implicit (unconscious) and explicit biases are holding women back in tech and leadership". He then goes on to explain why certain personality differences between men and women could also help account for this imbalance. I've been a programmer for many years and it's clear to me that men are naturally more inclined to write code than women. That's not to say women are less intelligent, they can certainly be programmers if they want to and I would love to see more of them, but I also see how the world works.

Just because women aren't doing something as much as men doesn't mean we need to take some assertive action to make sure there is a perfect balance. I truly don't know why Google would want to do anything besides apply the same hiring requirements for men and women and then hire who ever meets those requirements. If you end up having more men apply for the job or more men meet the requirements then so be it. Lowering the bar for certain groups of people is not a valid solution, or at least not a smart business solution, and it's not fair to those who truly do have skill.
edit on 6/8/2017 by ChaoticOrder because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 6 2017 @ 06:03 AM
link   
Not interested in the pinings of a conservative white male whose unable to cope with the conditions of the modern workplace.



posted on Aug, 6 2017 @ 06:11 AM
link   
a reply to: ChaoticOrder

So you're speaking of Youtube? I was speaking of the Google search engine as I made clear.

As far as comments and channels "disappearing" on Youtube, there are several ways that can happen none of which involve "censorship." Also, as a private company, (much like Facebook, Twitter and some of the other social media complained about in the oft-referred to video) Youtube can set the standards for content (not unlike, it happens, ATS). That's not "censorship" except in the most general terms. I really doubt that excluding extremist content from possible terrorists etc. is going to lose Youtube a lot of users. However, that too is opinion, like the rest of this discussion. Thanks for your answer.



posted on Aug, 6 2017 @ 06:26 AM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66


So you're speaking of Youtube? I was speaking of the Google search engine as I made clear.

Google owns YouTube. But yes the Google search results are also obviously manipulated to some extent.


I really doubt that excluding extremist content from possible terrorists etc. is going to lose Youtube a lot of users.

They are clearly using "terrorism" as a cover for their real intentions. Videos promoting terrorism already violate their TOS and they aren't going to crack down on less extreme Islamic videos because that would be totally against their ideology.
edit on 6/8/2017 by ChaoticOrder because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 6 2017 @ 06:29 AM
link   

originally posted by: Outlier13
a reply to: GusMcDangerthing

You are dead on. The internal memo and LiveLeak video posted in the OP is precisely about this type of person and their extremist left mindset.


Pretty much.
He/she/ze is arguing for the sake of argument. Because "you posted something bad about the left".

Gryph even admitted not taking the time to review your presented evidence before making a judgment on your OP.



posted on Aug, 6 2017 @ 06:30 AM
link   
I mostly feel sorry for Google. This is just proof jealousy and hate can be fabricated.

Hating "Big Google" is a conservative thing. Anyone with a brain can see what they're trying to do, and being against it is just divisionious.

What's truly sad is Republican's see everything as 'the good guys' and 'the bad guys', when Yahoo has been creating viruses for over 20 years(That specifically redirect to Yahoo!, who the hell would do this other than Yahoo!?). Yet, no one talks even the same level of bull# about Yahoo because it's a failed conservative mogul rip off that has done nothing innovative for 10 years other than buying out companies, and outsourcing to other engines. It's run by a bunch of conservatives though, so nothing to see here, other than the largest waste of shareholder money to ever touch a company.

Republican's are just becoming anti-progress itself. The attacks against Google are because of a bunch of stupid idiots misconstrue every detail about the topic from Business, basic math, to what Google actually even does. The tools Google provides for free is insane useful to humanity, try to be grateful for once in your miserable lives and stop bitching about Search Results, because that's the only thing you even know about Google, and you're wrong about it anyway.



posted on Aug, 6 2017 @ 06:36 AM
link   

originally posted by: ChaoticOrder

originally posted by: Gryphon66
Is there something against diversity in NOT AGREEING with someone else's opinion?

I don't recall saying that. Google is clearly breeding a certain type of culture within their business and that is now extremely apparent by looking at their attempts to censor certain view points over the last few months. When this is called into question by one of their employees he is criticized by other employees for being a "privileged white male".

Didn't Google basically say that they would filter searches in Hillary's favor during the election? Doing all but showing their political and social bias?

I'm sure you could Google that headline, but ya know. ..google and all.



new topics

top topics



 
38
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join