Jesus, that fcking guy is literal definition of failing upwards and instead of hiding it he spends his days SJWing on Twitter? Wonder how its like working with him...
Fitting since that's been Google's MO for years now.
Because it is currently in fashion to do so.
>What does this have to do with corporate greed?
It has to do with a lot of things, but specifically greed-related the very fastest way to lose money or damage your brand is to offend someone that has access to large social reach. So better for them to err on the side of safety.
Where is this “systemic bias” people keep crying about? I don’t see it in ads, in hiring policies, in college admission policies, etc.
In fact, I see the opposite: the group you mentioned is vilified and artificially held back across the board because it is fashionable. Fighting racism with a different kind of racism makes absolutely no sense.
The more we deviate from a meritocracy the more we all lose.
Modern western tech society will criticize (mostly correctly) a lack of diversity in basically any aspect of a company or technology. This often is expressed in shorthand as there being too many white cis men.
Don't forget google's fancy doors didn't work as well for black people at once point. Lots of bad PR.
Clearly not in this case, so it comes into question how right you think you are.
What is the racial and sexual makeup of the team that developed this system prompt? Should we disqualify any future attempt at that same racial and sexual makeup of team to be made again?
> Race and gender are two characteristics that lead to pretty different lived experiences, so having team members who can represent those experiences matters.
They matter so much, everything else is devalued?
Actually, no. In reality diversity is hindering progress since humans are not far from apes and really like inclusivity and tribalism. We sure do like to pretend it does tho.
I think this partially explains why corporations are so keen on diversity. The other part is decision makers in the corporation being true believers in the virtue of diversity. These complement each other; the best people to drive cynically motivated diversity agendas are people who really do believe they're doing the right thing.
You mean mostly as a politically-motivated anti-tech propaganda?
Tech is probably the most diverse high-earning industry. Definitely more diverse than NYTimes or most other media that promote such propaganda.
Which is also explicitly racist (much like Harvard) because the only way to deem tech industry “non-diverse” is to disregard Asians/Indians.
Google is sitting on a machine that was built by earlier generations and generates about $1B/day without much effort.
And that means they can instead put effort into things they're passionate about.