skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Has the true identity of Jack the Ripper been revealed?
I'm not really suggesting anything other than that, it's a hypothetical explanation that disproves the notion, "if diverse companies do better, it MUST be because of differences in the sexes". Admittedly not a high-effort comment.

In answer to the rest of your comment, it's anybody's guess and nobody agrees why. Maybe the stat is wrong, maybe the sexism is just that rampant, maybe the women-only candidate pool is inadequate (small), maybe there is a performance difference, etc.
Connectify Hotspot 2017 Crack with License Key Free Download
That's not persecution and it's certainly not "opposition to their right to exist", which was the original bullshit claim. Anyway, the APA (a very left leaning organization) diagnosis for transsexuality is Gender Identity Disorder (GID).
At least for phone interviews, the bias doesn't exist or goes the other way:

From http://blog.interviewing.io/we-built-voice-modulation-to-mas... :

After running the experiment, we ended up with some rather surprising results. Contrary to what we expected (and probably contrary to what you expected as well!), masking gender had no effect on interview performance with respect to any of the scoring criteria (would advance to next round, technical ability, problem solving ability). If anything, we started to notice some trends in the opposite direction of what we expected: for technical ability, it appeared that men who were modulated to sound like women did a bit better than unmodulated men and that women who were modulated to sound like men did a bit worse than unmodulated women. Though these trends weren’t statistically significant, I am mentioning them because they were unexpected and definitely something to watch for as we collect more data.
> Last I checked women like making money too.

Not as much as men. See a study [1] and Steven Pinker's slide [2], and many more studies. It's a well established scientific consensus.

> despite them operating on time scales that make this impossible.

The author isn't claiming that men evolved within 100 years, but simply that men have in thousands of years evolved to have skills more suitable for programming by a small margin. When considering the 99%tile, this small difference becomes quite big. According to [3], you find 4-10 times more men in the top 1% bracket than women in certain skills.

[1]: https://is.muni.cz/el/1423/jaro2011/SPP457/um/23632422/Hakim...

[2]: https://www.edge.org/3rd_culture/debate05/images/pinker.slid...

[3]: https://www.psychologytoday.com/files/attachments/56143/sex-...
I'm interested in reading objective, reasonable, preferably peer reviewed papers supporting either side of this argument. If you have any links, please post them.
Are comments still open? Test.
HDLs have no special advantage in evaluating boolean operations in simulation. Most simulators are significantly slower than native code unless they use compiler infrastructure used by mainstream languages and even then they still have the penalty of maintaining the simulation environment which serves no purpose in this application.
Do you just use a self-sponsored visa? I jump back and fourth but work for a US based company on salary. Curious if I could do the same?
Hard to say, would depend on whether or not they copied any code from the Closure compiler. It is possible they created their own implementation, but I wouldn't bet on it. Even if you treat it as EPL though, any output from the compiler won't be copyleft.
As I explained to another poster just now: this guy painted a target on himself by becoming a huge liability for Alphabet.

Sure, but if Google has already decided it is ok to discuss this issue on company message boards and that it wants to encourage debate and discussion (which it has), then it shouldn't then fire a guy just because he makes an argument other people don't like. The principled thing would be to stand for freedom of debate. Otherwise you are just ceding the company to cry-bullies, ceding the message boards to the faction that is more willing to self-modify to be offended at opposing viewpoints. If anything, Google should fire the employees who responded with personal invective against a fellow Googler.

By stating that he's OK with discriminating by gender, he put them in a position where they'd have to flag him as someone who couldn't manage a mixed-gender team.

He did not say this. He is against discriminating against gender and wants the same hiring and recruiting process regardless of gender.
Where exactly did he argue that?

I get the feeling that this document is what Scott Adams talks about when he writes that two people can sit in the same movie theater, look at the same screen, and watch two different movies play out.
> It took a few months to get my head around it, but once you do, it becomes so obviously simple and easy that you start thinking in it directly

This is exactly where functional programming shines, in my opinion. It gives you the ability to write your program logic directly, rather than use mechanical constructs (e.g. for loops with indexes) that behave as some logical construct.

The “for(i=0;...)” construct is something I’d give to a machine for the purpose of execution, whereas the logical description is how I’d explain it to a human — and the former can be deduced from the latter.
Men and women don't need to act as blocs for an asymmetrical power imbalance to exist.
Hahaha! That's the first good laugh I had in this thread. I had a few other laughs, but then I realized the people weren't joking...
What? As far as I know you shouldn't put your gender, age or photo in the CV because the company who review it can be sued for discrimination. (A recruiter from US made me delete that information when I was applying to us companies).

Isn't Google ratios similar to Facebook and other companies in San Francisco? (But not to other states).

I am more confuse now after the information you gave me.
There is a huge opportunity to build an app that turns into audio reference. No music, or direct communication, but everything else related to talk and listen. The world still communicates through talk. "Since these are new consumers, everything is up for grabs," That's the potential for disruption. "
A number of women(yes, even women Googlers) have come out to support James. I'm curious if you respect their personal experience here or not?
The author is right in that there is some evidence there are, on average, trait differences between biological sexes but it's dangerous to make the claim that some traits are better for certain types of work or that these differences can satisfactory explain a gender gap. Those conclusions aren't justified by his evidence.

Engineering can absolutely benefit from 'people' minded individuals as much as 'thing' minded. It's just it usually takes a few tours of 'thing' focused jr. engineering before you can get into the 'people' related challenges seen when doing large scale software engineering.

If you follow contemporary conservatives like Jordan Peterson you can find a lot of the same themes of social construction vs biology or 'institutional liberalism' he finds in academia.
No. Maybe we just believe in equality for all regardless of race or sex. If a cool course opens but only for women, or people of color, of course that makes us feel alienated.
What happens when the wind stops blowing and all the kites crash to the ground in a tangled mess?
Doubt it. Google is big enough to be picky and make a cut like this. There are plenty of places that would pick up a Google tier engineer regardless of backlash. The company doesn't even need to be desperate.

Michael Vick got picked up by an NFL team after dog fighting. It will be similar to that only this guy won't be a celeb.
Google seems to be culturally ahead of the curve, for better or worse: some of the craziest things I've heard in the last few years (eg explicit denial of the value of innocent-until-proven-guilty and idea pluralism), I heard internally from other Googlers _years_ before I would've expected to hear it outside. (Now, of course, both of those things are routine).

Similarly, there's been a bit of a turning of the tide publicly back towards sanity: the first thing I can recall seeing that signaled a defense of basic liberal tenets was The Atlantic's "The Coddling of the American Mind". No one with a baker's dozen of brain cells found anything new in that, but for the vast majority of people who only consider an idea when their chosen publications grant their approval,
it was a huge step. (Pres Obama pushed back against this kind of barbarity in his own half of the political spectrum much earlier, but he was politely ignored).

It's kind of interesting to see Google culture out in front of the pendulum's swing back, too. I can't imagine this kind of an essay being published in most "blue tribe" fora.
If there's anything he can't be blamed for is thinking. If he did more of that, he wouldn't be where he is.
I had to read this a few times, but I think I get it now.
The original manifesto author means that the "bar is lowered" for diverse candidates because they're scrutinized more carefully and fewer qualified candidates are eliminated? If you're good enough and diverse, you're more likely to be hired than if you're good enough and ... whatever the word for not-diverse is? The original author is not claiming that more unqualified diverse candidates are hired, just that it's easier to get hired if you're qualified and diverse?

If I've understood that correctly I really appreciate your effort in explaining it. Your comment should be higher so more people could see it :)

Also, if I understand you correctly, the phrase "lower the bar" might have gotten him fired for something he wasn't intending to say.
Phew - I was worried I would actually have to read the responses and form an opinion on the science. Good to hear that we can Kevin-Bacon them over to "uncritically praising" an event put on by Ben Shapiro. There can be little doubt that they're evil shills now, so I don't have to bother.
It's illegal to fire people over their politics, and that's clearly what happened here.
Sarcasm. "Probably one of the most" is quite a few weasel words for somebody universally included in any list of significant physicists.
Oh God, please no.

When I'm working next to someone, I can hear and see if they are busy. I can roll over and then discover they have their headphones on, and then I should use other means.

The last thing I want is to have my computer audio/video interrupted at the convenience of the person on the other end, whenever they have some random thought and they can't wait to share that with me.
Which 'aren't even facts' are you talking about here?
BoFa are the biggest scammers!
It doesn't though. Unless I'm missing something obvious, it only has an A record, not a AAAA.
Code of conduct is not above laws in the United States.
You missed my sarcasm. I did indeed think it was quite an understatement / poor writing to be so afraid to say "one of the best physicists of the 20th century".
Another Montanan here as well.

As the Lolo Peak Fire burns 6 miles from my house it is frustrating to me that the DNRC's hands are tied by regulation that prevents them thinning and keep our forests healthy. It is both a revenue stream for our school system and an important role in keeping the woods healthy. Unfortunately both wildlife and habitat conservation has some aspects that are counter-intuitive to most folks when they ask why taking an animal or taking a tree actually helps in the long run. This isn't meant to be a pro/anti regulation stance but a call for balance.

There is also the most important factor in fighting these fires and currently that number is 2, as in we've lost 2 firefighters during this season's wild fires.
New Features from Facebook, Twitter and Pinterest You Need to Know
So, what is a card sort and why would I want one?
We had racial policy in the form of slavery, then segregation and Jim Crow, to discriminatory housing policies, to inequitable application of drug laws but now, let's just ignore race and all of its historical context when it comes to outreach and public policy.

That is how it is possible to logically disenfranchise a group of individuals by ignoring their group characteristics. The disenfranchisement already happened.

Diversity programs are not about punishment it is about recognizing the historical context in which we are acting.
Three out of four scientists in this article agreed with the Google memo. Something like 95% of scientists accept the prevailing theory that climate change is exacerbated by human activities. That's obviously the same thing, right?
"some groups of people are just biologically inferior" is not a political disagreement and it is deliberately misleading to label it as such.
>Nearly every disease has an opposite which is also bad.

[citation needed]. Also, you can't use evolutionary arguments like that, to justify everything. What about the plague? What about an anvil to the head? What's the opposite of getting a heavy object dropped on your head and if there is none then why didn't we evolve a titanium skill? You see where I'm going? It just didn't because we don't immediately evolve defenses against every single danger and disease in existence. Evolutionary arguments aren't worth very much and certainly can't be applied in such a maximalist way.
With this design and makani's you hover under grid power and land like a quadcopter. Same for takeoff.
Generate Barcode with Logo in Place of Codetext and Identify Type of Code128
Apparently you are unfamiliar with: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/At-will_employment

I guess you don't work in the United States? Because it's certainly fine for him to be fired for this.
Google Fires Engineer Who Wrote Memo Questioning Women in Tech
I am ashamed to be an ex-bank of America employee. The bank is doing nothing to help these students. They keep blaming these young victims for their ignorance.
MONARC – Method for an Optimised ANAlysis of Risks by CASES
There's a third kind -- indexical randomness, or not knowing who you will be -- that appears in many-worlds. Many worlds is in some sense completely deterministic. Yet with indexical uncertainty you still cannot possibly ever know which way you will see a photon go in a half-silvered mirror. Is that fundamental randomness or not?

http://lesswrong.com/lw/jlb/logical_and_indexical_uncertaint...
Related: "Message encryption a problem - Rudd"
http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-40788180

It looks like the UK government is totally illogical with regards to tech. If you cannot use hard encryption, how are you supposed to defend yourself against hackers?
sure just hire 100 black women in his place, they will do his job better
The post I responded specifically said the memo author got all biological research wrong. Now, his conclusions from that are certainly more debatable.

I guess the larger point I was trying to make is that when people feel singled out because of statistical differences b it leads them to take things personally, which leads to perpetuating disproportionate reactions and a non-existing platform for actual discussion.
Let's be clear. He isn't doing science. I support research done in a scientific way, but he is cherry picking research to further a political agenda in the workplace. To act like this is science is despicable.
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=diversity+studies+site%3Aedu
I appreciate that, but I don't think raising up some random guy on reddit is a valid way of drawing a conclusion.

Person A thinks X.

Person B who belongs a group the blue tribe hates also thinks X.

Therefore person A is a bad person because they agree with person B about X.

We have failed to prove that the group person B belongs to is actually bad and not just an exercise in signaling and we are also trying to smear person A by saying they agree with some other completely unrelated person who may belong to a distasteful group. Additionally X can still be correct and both people can be distasteful, but it wont change the fact that X is correct.

Sorry if I am not being clear, it's been a long day.
Honestly I knew where this was going when I saw him mention biological differences. Which is a shame because many of his arguments are actually interesting. The tl;dr is actually chilling in the light of this firing.

His points were that some diversity policies were misguided and may even cause harm but are impossible to correct because they are taboo.

His memo was well-argumented and he was open to contradiction, which on several points could have been brought.

It was not aggressive, not dismissive, not sexist. I personally view his firing as totally excessive and downright anti-intellectual.

Critics, we are not yet in a post-sexist society. We have to improve many things for women and minorities, we have many efforts to make to reach true equality. Shutting down debate on your tactics will not help.
"If the number of hires is kept constant" is a huge IF that just doesn't hold up. If Google (or FB, or Apple) could find more candidates that met their hiring bar, they'd hire them as well. It's not a zero-sum game - these companies are constantly short on qualified engineers.

[my opinion, not my employer's.]
I think you missed his point, he's not saying anything right of center is one short hop away from evil nazis!

He's saying "Isn't it kind of strange that everyone else seems to have completely lost their minds?"
Hence the white and gold, (er, blue and black dress). I'd reiterate and ask you to have a conversation with a female colleague or friend who works in tech and ask for their perspective.
Stop thinking of politics as left/right. It's multipolar.
Cool project!
Reminds me of Naivechain, a blockchain in 200 lines of code

https://github.com/lhartikk/naivechain
The burden of proof is on the side arguing there's something "special" about Google. The effect is present everywhere we've looked. Lacking any specific evidence to the contrary, it's present in Google hiring too.
I am a stutterer as well. Yeah I remember the constant humiliation and being made fun of, the bullying. It often included teachers, extended family members, and adults. My parents tried speech therapy, unfortunately, it was the Soviet version, and in their typical irony, they had put the only children's speech pathologist's office in my city, in a mental hospital. So to get to the appointment I had to witness some scary behavior from some of patients. Needless to say we had stopped going there after a while. I always wondered who came up with that setup, someone had a very dark sense of humor.
The important context though is in how the conference was promoted in the first place, though.
What was the politically-correct talk that gave rise to Nazism?
I think the majority of what people find problematic is Gizmodo removing all the references, removing the chart that explained the core concept in the idea and aggressively misrepresenting the author's positions. I think the author could do more to acknowledge the 'default' state of no programs is unfair and people would have to find something else to find problematic if he did so but I think most of the problematic comes from virtue signalling attached to misrepsentation and oversimplification of complicated issues.
That "predictor" or monetary stock and flow theory that blog post describes is well over 100 years old now and very well known (pre-Keynesian and going back to at least Irving Fisher). It has also been studied in detail in academia for decades if anyone wants to look up proper research studies about it. The blog author maybe should have mentioned that this is already a well known and tested predictor, and if the author hadn't heard of before writing that blog post I would question that entire site.

There are also several companies that specialize in providing this exact cash/equity data research to financial firms to help them manage their trading strategies and offering more practical details in their data than FRED data offers. For example TrimTabs [1] (no affiliation) has been around since 1990 according to their website [1] trimtabs.com
Gender does not come up during interviews but they will search across the 50 states for a diversity candidate equal to a local standard candidate. Their HR has diversity goals and will want diversity referrals from current emps to fulfil their goals.
That is not a long time for something like this.
For a significant portion of American history there was an established difference in the distribution of the ability of people to own property. More recently there's an established difference in the distribution of the ability of minorities, students, and liberals to vote in certain states (NC, WI, TX, among others). There was an established difference in the incidence of AIDS during the 80's. There are established differences in the distribution of outcomes related to conviction of minor drug possession, soliciting prostitution, and a host of other non-violent crimes. Heck, there's an established difference in the distribution of police pulling people over or otherwise detaining people without cause in many municipalities.

Trying to justify discrimination by referring to the direct result of discriminatory behavior is obscene.
You can do it by checking that the solution provided is a valid traversal of the graph, and does not touch two vertices twice. If there are N vertices, you can check in O(N) time.
There are more inhospitable places on earth for life than this and they are much less hot and acidic. For instance, in the Atacama desert, the driest parts of which have never recorded rain and look like a spitting image of Mars, NASA scientists looked for bacteria and found absolutely nothing[1]. The researchers even said: "The Atacama is the only place on Earth that I've taken soil samples to grow microorganisms back at the lab and nothing whatsoever grew."

1. https://www.nasa.gov/centers/ames/news/releases/2003/03_87AR...
Floppy Portraits by Nick-Gentry
I'm not saying people shouldn't discuss company policies. I'm saying they shouldn't turn those policy discussions into a national/cultural political argument.

I suspect that this memo wasn't any more political than much that gets shared in the message boards at Google. This issue was already politicized and the main gist of the politics stuff was, "Both sides bring insights and biases to the table, so we should do a better job making it comfortable for conservatives to speak up." By the standards of what I see going on the political discourse this was pretty tame stuff. The responses to the piece were 100X worse -- https://files.gab.ai/image/5986e3f03d1f1.jpeg
Also, even if the gender differences were backed by research, what's not backed by research is the assumption that those differences have any significant impact on women's capacity to perform the same work as men. Remember--the scientific method is about making a falsifiable hypothesis and then gathering enough evidence to be able to reject it. In this case the falsifiable hypothesis would have to be that men and women have no significant difference in their ability to perform the same work.
It's a problem because it closes off further investigation - same as the anthropic principle. It's an answer for everything, but doesn't tell us anything about where to look next.

So if it's right, it needs to rigourously exclude everything else.
So, in other words, a language needs general recursion in order for library authors to implement map/fold/reduce etc. However, everyday programmers shouldn’t use general recursion, but rather stick to these library constructs (for the sake of correctness)?
There absolutely are people who are against any claims that men and women are biologically different, the president of Harvard got fired for even hinting that this was a possibility. Another way to look at it, if there are differences between men and women than you would expect men to be better at some things and women to be better at some things. Try claiming one of the sexes is better at anything and see how that goes over.