A view from an ex google person Re A Googler's Would-Be Manifesto Reveals Tech's Rotten Core

["Dave Farber" <farber () gmail com>]

Begin forwarded message:

> From: Michael Sinatra <michael () burnttofu net>
> Date: August 6, 2017 at 6:13:12 PM EDT
> To: dave () farber net
> Subject: Re: [IP] A Googler's Would-Be Manifesto Reveals Tech's Rotten Core
>
> Viewpoint from an ex-Googler:
> https://medium.com/@yonatanzunger/so-about-this-googlers-manifesto-1e3773ed1788
>
>
> > On 8/6/17 12:19 PM, Dave Farber wrote:
> > One person (i think) condemns a company!!!!! REALLY  DJF
> > > Begin forwarded message:
> > >
> > > *From: *Dewayne Hendricks <dewayne () warpspeed com <mailto:dewayne () warpspeed com>>
> > > *Subject: **[Dewayne-Net] A Googler's Would-Be Manifesto Reveals Tech's Rotten Core*
> > > *Date: *August 6, 2017 at 12:27:12 PM EDT
> > > *To: *Multiple recipients of Dewayne-Net <dewayne-net () warpspeed com <mailto:dewayne-net () warpspeed com>>
> > > *Reply-To: *dewayne-net () warpspeed com <mailto:dewayne-net () warpspeed com>
> > >
> > > A Googler's Would-Be Manifesto Reveals Tech's Rotten Core
> > > Office culture is only part of the problem.
> > > By IAN BOGOST
> > > Aug 6 2017
> > > <https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2017/08/why-is-tech-so-awful/536052/>
> > >
> > > An anonymous Google software engineer’s 10-page fulmination against workplace diversity was leaked from internal 
> > > company communications systems, including an internal version of Google+, the company’s social network, and another 
> > > service that Gizmodo, which published the full memo, called an “internal meme network.”
> > >
> > > “I’m simply stating that the distribution of preferences and abilities of men and women differ in part due to 
> > > biological causes,” the Googler writes, “and that these differences may explain why we don’t see equal 
> > > representation of women in tech and leadership.”
> > >
> > > The memo has drawn rage and dismay since its appearance Saturday, when it was first reported by Motherboard. It 
> > > seemed to dash hopes that much progress has been made in unraveling the systemic conditions that produce and 
> > > perpetuate inequity in the technology industry. That includes increasing the distribution of women and minorities 
> > > in technical jobs, equalizing pay, breaking the glass ceiling, and improving the quality of life in workplaces that 
> > > sometimes resemble frat houses more than businesses.
> > >
> > > These reactions to the screed are sound, but they risk missing a larger problem: The kind of computing systems that 
> > > get made and used by people outside the industry, and with serious consequences, are a direct byproduct of the 
> > > gross machismo of computing writ large. More women and minorities are needed in computing because the world would 
> > > be better for their contributions—and because it might be much worse without them.
> > >
> > > * * *
> > >
> > > Workplace equity has become a more visible issue in general, but it has reached fever pitch in the technology 
> > > sector, especially with respect to women. When the former Uber engineer Susan Fowler published an explosive 
> > > accusation of sexism at that company earlier this year, people took notice. When combined with a series of other 
> > > scandals, not to mention with Uber’s longstanding, dubious behavior toward drivers and municipalities, the company 
> > > was forced to act. CEO Travis Kalanick was ousted (although he remains on the board, where he retains substantial 
> > > control).
> > >
> > > Given the context, it’s reasonable to sneer at the anonymous Googler’s simple grievances against workplace 
> > > diversity. Supposedly natural differences between men and women make them suited for different kinds of work, he 
> > > argues. Failure to accept this condition casts the result as inequality, he contends, and then as oppression. 
> > > Seeking to correct for it amounts to discrimination. Rejecting these premises constitutes bias, or stymies open 
> > > discourse. The Googler does not reject the idea of increasing diversity in some way. However, he laments what he 
> > > considers discriminatory practices instituted to accomplish those goals, among them hiring methods designed to 
> > > increase the diversity of candidate pools and training or mentoring efforts meant to better support 
> > > under-represented groups.
> > >
> > > Efforts like these are necessary in the first place because diversity is so bad in the technology industry to begin 
> > > with. Google publishes a diversity report, which reveals that the company’s workforce is currently comprised of 31 
> > > percent women, with 20 percent working in technical fields. Those numbers are roughly on par with the tech sector 
> > > as a whole, where about a quarter of workers are women.
> > >
> > > Racial and ethnic diversity are even worse—and so invisible that they barely register as a problem for the 
> > > anonymous Googler. I was chatting about the memo with my Georgia Tech colleague Charles Isbell, who is Executive 
> > > Associate Dean of the College of Computing and the only black tenure-track faculty member among over 80 in this 
> > > top-ten ranking program.
> > >
> > > “Nothing about why black and Hispanic men aren’t software engineers?” he asked me after reading the letter, 
> > > paraphrasing another black computer scientist, Duke’s Jeffrey R.N. Forbes. “Did I glaze over that bit?” Isbell 
> > > knows that Google’s meager distribution of women  far outshines its terrible racial diversity. Only 2 percent of 
> > > all U.S. Googlers are black, and only 4 percent are Hispanic. In tech-oriented positions, the numbers fall to 1 
> > > percent and 3 percent, respectively. (Unlike the gender data, which is global, the ethnic diversity data is for the 
> > > U.S. only.)
> > >
> > > [snip]
> > >
> > > Dewayne-Net RSS Feed: http://dewaynenet.wordpress.com/feed/
> > > Twitter: https://twitter.com/wa8dzp
> > Archives <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/247/=now> 
> > <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/247/14053145-25f24aac> | Modify <https://www.listbox.com/member/?&;> Your 
> > Subscription | Unsubscribe Now 
> > <https://www.listbox.com/unsubscribe/?&&post_id=20170806151947:33D23214-7ADC-11E7-A2D3-FDADF0323071>    [Powered by 
> > Listbox] <http://www.listbox.com>



-------------------------------------------
Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/247/=now
RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/247/18849915-ae8fa580
Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=18849915&id_secret=18849915-aa268125
Unsubscribe Now: 
https://www.listbox.com/unsubscribe/?member_id=18849915&id_secret=18849915-32545cb4&post_id=20170806190713:F938019A-7AFB-11E7-9AF7-D24B9EED0112
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com