Yasna wrote:Not perfect, but we can assume that a knowledge-based company which is one of the best performing in the history of mankind makes some excellent hiring decisions
We can also assume that it makes some terrible ones. I'm really not sure how anyone who lived through the dotcom bust can still carry around the idea that knowledge economy types are somehow less susceptible to cognitive biases than people in any other industry.
Yasna wrote:This goes back to the virtue signalling
There's that word again!
Same problem as above: Like you, he completely disregards the meat of Zunger's criticism--that Damore is not an expert on what makes a good engineer--and begs the question of whether the supposed sex-linked differences observed are even relevant.
Yasna wrote:He didn't give any numbers, so it could be just a tiny percentage of current employees who benefited from the lowered bar.
If it's really a "tiny percentage", why even bring it up? He clearly thought it was a substantial enough problem to wager his job on.
Yasna wrote:In any case, nothing like "publicly declaring a third of your fellow employees unqualified for their jobs". Not to mention Damore didn't do it publicly, but internally.
The point is that he still did it where a substantial number of those employees could see it. As others more versed in labour protections have pointed out, that's textbook "hostile environment" creation.