🚀 go-pugleaf

On 2/26/2024 11:18 PM, D. Ray, Nazi, lied:

> A former Google employee now says he was barred from promotion due to his
> race.

We know that's a lie, Nazi.

  This message is in MIME format.  The first part should be readable text,
  while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools.

--8323328-84454241-1709029299=:19569
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE



On Tue, 27 Feb 2024, D. Ray wrote:

> A former Google employee now says he was barred from promotion due to his
> race. The employee, Shaun Maguire, initially blew the whistle in 2023 but
> made a public statement on X, formerly Twitter, following public backlash
> to anti-White bias allegations in the company’s new “Gemini” AI.
>
> …
>
> …
>
> <https://nationaltimes.news/google-employee-barred-from-promotion-for-being-a-white-man/>
>
> <https://archive.ph/ffOCW>

I would assume there is no iron clad proof of this. On the other hand, as 
I tell people I know who experienced the same due to gender or 
nationality, you don't want to remain at that company anyway so 
paradoxically you should be happy it happened so you can move on to a 
company that is more aligned with your values and interests.
--8323328-84454241-1709029299=:19569--

D <nospam@example.net> writes:

> On Tue, 27 Feb 2024, Anton Shepelev wrote:
>
>> D:
>>
>>> I would assume there is no iron clad proof of this. On the
>>> other hand, as I tell people I know who experienced the
>>> same due to gender or nationality, you don't want to
>>> remain at that company anyway so paradoxically you should
>>> be happy it happened so you can move on to a company that
>>> is more aligned with your values and interests.
>>
>> That's selfish.  The existance of such companies is harmful
>> to the entire humanity, not only to persons with differing
>> values.
>
> No, it's rational. Companies are private property and therefore the
> owner may do with them what they wish. The market will sort out
> companies who reject competent employees in time, and companies who
> accept competent employees regardless of color will thrive.
>
> The entity that makes this a problem is the government.

But isn't government put together by companies?

D:

> I would assume there is no iron clad proof of this. On the
> other hand, as I tell people I know who experienced the
> same due to gender or nationality, you don't want to
> remain at that company anyway so paradoxically you should
> be happy it happened so you can move on to a company that
> is more aligned with your values and interests.

That's selfish.  The existance of such companies is harmful
to the entire humanity, not only to persons with differing
values.

--
()  ascii ribbon campaign -- against html e-mail
/\  www.asciiribbon.org   -- against proprietary attachments

On Tue, 27 Feb 2024, Anton Shepelev wrote:

> D:
>
>> I would assume there is no iron clad proof of this. On the
>> other hand, as I tell people I know who experienced the
>> same due to gender or nationality, you don't want to
>> remain at that company anyway so paradoxically you should
>> be happy it happened so you can move on to a company that
>> is more aligned with your values and interests.
>
> That's selfish.  The existance of such companies is harmful
> to the entire humanity, not only to persons with differing
> values.

No, it's rational. Companies are private property and therefore the owner
may do with them what they wish. The market will sort out companies who
reject competent employees in time, and companies who accept competent
employees regardless of color will thrive.

The entity that makes this a problem is the government.

>d pr

Google has been firing Trumpers and all employees with Russian names since
day 1.    Good for them.

>>> That's selfish.  The existance of such companies is harmful

you think being white is the problem then why will trump be beaten to a pulp
and raped in the prison shower by black men because he's orange?
\

On Tue, 27 Feb 2024, Julieta Shem wrote:

> D <nospam@example.net> writes:
>
>> On Tue, 27 Feb 2024, Anton Shepelev wrote:
>>
>>> D:
>>>
>>>> I would assume there is no iron clad proof of this. On the
>>>> other hand, as I tell people I know who experienced the
>>>> same due to gender or nationality, you don't want to
>>>> remain at that company anyway so paradoxically you should
>>>> be happy it happened so you can move on to a company that
>>>> is more aligned with your values and interests.
>>>
>>> That's selfish.  The existance of such companies is harmful
>>> to the entire humanity, not only to persons with differing
>>> values.
>>
>> No, it's rational. Companies are private property and therefore the
>> owner may do with them what they wish. The market will sort out
>> companies who reject competent employees in time, and companies who
>> accept competent employees regardless of color will thrive.
>>
>> The entity that makes this a problem is the government.
>
> But isn't government put together by companies?
>

No it's politicians. What differentiates government and companies is that
government govern countries and are back with violence. What defines a
company is that it acts on markets and have customers who can voluntarily
choose to do business or not with the company.

D <nospam@example.net> writes:

> On Tue, 27 Feb 2024, Julieta Shem wrote:
>
>> D <nospam@example.net> writes:
>>
>>> On Tue, 27 Feb 2024, Anton Shepelev wrote:
>>>
>>>> D:
>>>>
>>>>> I would assume there is no iron clad proof of this. On the
>>>>> other hand, as I tell people I know who experienced the
>>>>> same due to gender or nationality, you don't want to
>>>>> remain at that company anyway so paradoxically you should
>>>>> be happy it happened so you can move on to a company that
>>>>> is more aligned with your values and interests.
>>>>
>>>> That's selfish.  The existance of such companies is harmful
>>>> to the entire humanity, not only to persons with differing
>>>> values.
>>>
>>> No, it's rational. Companies are private property and therefore the
>>> owner may do with them what they wish. The market will sort out
>>> companies who reject competent employees in time, and companies who
>>> accept competent employees regardless of color will thrive.
>>>
>>> The entity that makes this a problem is the government.
>>
>> But isn't government put together by companies?
>>
>
> No it's politicians. What differentiates government and companies is
> that government govern countries and are back with violence. What
> defines a company is that it acts on markets and have customers who
> can voluntarily choose to do business or not with the company.

Together, companies make up a huge amount of money and other kinds of
power.  They finance the campaigns and effectively attract politicians
who will (un)naturally be docile to their desires.  Hasn't times changed
from monarchies to a new form of government that is simply an oligarchy?

Perhaps you can choose your leader, but that's irrelevant.

Real discussions don't even come up.  We have a population that's
totally vulnerable to propaganda, which is what companies are
specialized in.

On 2/28/2024 5:41 AM, Julieta Shem wrote:
> D <nospam@example.net> writes:
>
> [...]
>
>> But... you are certainly right in what you are saying, but to a big
>> extent this is due to government interfering in the markets, awarding
>> companies enormous contracts and protecting them. So you have a
>> downward spiral.
>
> If governments are put together by companies,

They're not. No need to read past that bullshit proposition.

On Tue, 27 Feb 2024, Julieta Shem wrote:

> D <nospam@example.net> writes:
>
>> On Tue, 27 Feb 2024, Julieta Shem wrote:
>>
>>> D <nospam@example.net> writes:
>>>
>>>> On Tue, 27 Feb 2024, Anton Shepelev wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> D:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I would assume there is no iron clad proof of this. On the
>>>>>> other hand, as I tell people I know who experienced the
>>>>>> same due to gender or nationality, you don't want to
>>>>>> remain at that company anyway so paradoxically you should
>>>>>> be happy it happened so you can move on to a company that
>>>>>> is more aligned with your values and interests.
>>>>>
>>>>> That's selfish.  The existance of such companies is harmful
>>>>> to the entire humanity, not only to persons with differing
>>>>> values.
>>>>
>>>> No, it's rational. Companies are private property and therefore the
>>>> owner may do with them what they wish. The market will sort out
>>>> companies who reject competent employees in time, and companies who
>>>> accept competent employees regardless of color will thrive.
>>>>
>>>> The entity that makes this a problem is the government.
>>>
>>> But isn't government put together by companies?
>>>
>>
>> No it's politicians. What differentiates government and companies is
>> that government govern countries and are back with violence. What
>> defines a company is that it acts on markets and have customers who
>> can voluntarily choose to do business or not with the company.
>
> Together, companies make up a huge amount of money and other kinds of
> power.  They finance the campaigns and effectively attract politicians
> who will (un)naturally be docile to their desires.  Hasn't times changed
> from monarchies to a new form of government that is simply an oligarchy?
>
> Perhaps you can choose your leader, but that's irrelevant.
>
> Real discussions don't even come up.  We have a population that's
> totally vulnerable to propaganda, which is what companies are
> specialized in.
>

Yet you are here pointing this out which disproves what you're saying. If
you and I can realize this, so can others. Not affirming this feels a bit
elitist to me.

But... you are certainly right in what you are saying, but to a big extent
this is due to government interfering in the markets, awarding companies
enormous contracts and protecting them. So you have a downward spiral.

Remove the government and the rest will follow.

Now, one last thing. I admit that I am arguing for a "utopian state" and I
admit that we are today _not_ living in this utopian state. The question
of _how_ to get from today, to a world without governments, and with only
individuals and companies is a different, but very interesting question.

D <nospam@example.net> writes:

[...]

> But... you are certainly right in what you are saying, but to a big
> extent this is due to government interfering in the markets, awarding
> companies enormous contracts and protecting them. So you have a
> downward spiral.

If governments are put together by companies, it's expected that they
would protect companies when necessary.  To dismantle government, we
need to take the power off companies in the first place.

> Remove the government and the rest will follow.

Can't remove government if you don't weaken the power of companies.
Government, which we see as opposed to companies, is actually their
secret weapon.

I don't think that what governments do is so difficult that interested
regular people can't do themselves.  An interesting idea is
``sortition'': make ineffective company investment in government.
Instead of providing companies easy, docile politicians to work for
them, let them deal with regular people.  Some of these new government
officials will be failures, but what about the /average/ case?

I believe in people, but I recognize the fact that they appear totally
vulnerable to propaganda.  So I also realize that we need to protect
them from propaganda itself, therefore we need to weaken the power of
companies.  We won't achieve this protection by making government more
powerful because that means making companies more powerful.  We untie
government from companies by making companies investment in government
ineffective.  Instead of selecting government by popularity, we select
government by random choice.

> Now, one last thing. I admit that I am arguing for a "utopian state"
> and I admit that we are today _not_ living in this utopian state. The
> question of _how_ to get from today, to a world without governments,
> and with only individuals and companies is a different, but very
> interesting question.

I think everything here is doable.  We need to make our belief in
people's capacity to happen.