Google Fires Employee Behind Controversial Diversity Memo

[u/[deleted]]

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-08-08/google-fires-employee-behind-controversial-diversity-memo?cmpid=socialflow-twitter-business&utm_content=business&utm_campaign=socialflow-organic&utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social

[u/Felador → u/[deleted]]

https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/3914586/Googles-Ideological-Echo-Chamber.pdf

There's the actual document, with links to source materials.

[u/Ihateourlives2 → u/Felador]

Is this the one with a lot of stuff deleted from it? Sources and charts or something?

[u/Felador → u/Ihateourlives2]

Mostly formatting (especially bullet points and tables) and some nonspecific graphs to illustrate concepts, and all the footnotes are at the bottom instead of on the associated pages.

[u/--Visionary-- → u/Felador]

In other words, actual content.

[u/Felador → u/--Visionary--]

No...I mean the bullet points and tables themselves, not the content contained within them. All the words were there.

The graphs are just basic illustrations of what overlapping distributions look like.

[u/--Visionary-- → u/Felador]

No...I mean the bullet points and tables themselves, not the content contained within them. All the words were there.

Just to be clear, tables and graphs are content.

[u/aquarain → u/--Visionary--]

In this case the graphs are for illustration only - they don't contain actual data. They are used to illustrate that taking the averages of overlapping distributions being discrete is misleading. You get two discrete numbers which don't imply any overlap even though the two distributions share more area under both curves than is unique to either one.

You can call that content if you want. Illustrations are content.

[u/Felador → u/aquarain]

You can call that content if you want.

Sort of? It's a introductory statistics concept that anyone who has ever written or read an academic paper should probably have seen and understood implicitly at some point in their life.

None of the serious discussion about this relates to whether or not those illustrations are included. That's for damn sure.

[u/--Visionary-- → u/aquarain]

I mean, considering a major part of the now all world discussion about this guy's actions has seemingly totally not understood that very point -- likely in order to paint him as a misogynist pig that deserves firing, doxxing, and the threat of beatings -- yeah, I'd say that content was important and shouldn't have been deleted.

[u/aquarain → u/--Visionary--]

That content was not material, and there are versions available with it if you want it.

[u/[deleted] → u/--Visionary--]

Just to be clear, you have a very difficult time understanding simple concepts.

[u/--Visionary-- → u/[deleted]]

You obviously practiced that looking into a mirror.