|
|
|
|
|
by mejari
3228 days ago
|
|
>He merely states that it can have that effect. He "merely" says that Google is doing it, and that doing it lowers the bar. Therefore he's saying that Google lowered the bar. It's a pretty simple a = b = c scenario >It looks like a logical conclusion to me. Care to explain why you think it's not? Because women can achieve at the same level as men? I thought it was pretty obvious. |
|
> "Google has created several discriminatory practices: ... Hiring practices which can effectively lower the bar for “diversity” candidates by decreasing the false negative rate"
Please note the last 5 words. Damore wasn't saying that diversity candidates got jobs in spite of being below the bar. He was saying that decreasing the false negative rates for certain groups is discriminatory towards those who don't belong to said groups.
E.g., the point is that focusing on decreasing false negative rates for group A but not for group B, will mean that, on average, more people who are close to the bar will be hired from group A than from group B. This is unfair to group B, since they are much less likely to get "the benefit of the doubt".
In essence, the quote relates to how Google deals differently with uncertainty depending on the gender of an individual.