David Thompson
Subscribe
Blog powered by Typepad

« Elsewhere (242) | Main | The Legends Were True »

August 08, 2017

Comments

Ian

Or is it 401?

TomJ

No.

TomJ

I stand corrected.

prm

I think that was it, was it not? Can we go home now?

Farnsworth M Muldoon

Or is it 401?

Like Christmas morning it is gov'nor, as the dawn of a brand new page...

David

“Leadership and the Sexes,” a talk by Michael Gurian, given at Google HQ nine years ago.

Captain Nemo

This is the thread that doesn't end.
Yes, it goes on and on my friend.
Some people started commenting not knowing what it was,
And they'll continue commenting forever just because
This is the thread that doesn't end...

What? Just thought I'd inject a little... humour into the proceedings.

Mags

“Leadership and the Sexes,” a talk by Michael Gurian, given at Google HQ nine years ago.

Compare and contrast. :-)

David

Compare and contrast. :-)

I make no claims for the particulars of the talk, but it’s interesting that the topic of psychological and neurological gender differences was, not too long ago, deemed suitable for discussion by Google management and employees, and indeed advantageous. And during the talk, none of the ladies present seem particularly outraged, or oppressed, or in need of a fainting couch.

Farnsworth M Muldoon

I make no claims for the particulars of the talk...

Start around here, it has sciencey stuff not unlike that which Damore said.

WTP

is it just me or does it seem that the war of words is turning in our hero's favour?

No, it's not just you. But it only seems that way. If you read the longer responses of our hero's defenders, you will find some really big buts (h/t Pee Wee Herman). From what I can see, the bigger problem here isn't about science or freedom of speech or any number of other things. It's the egos of these people. They are "smart". They have been told that they are "smart" since early childhood. Thus they have very little internal self-correcting mechanisms or doubts about what they know. Their entire personalities have been built on being right, or being perceived as right, often enough that when they are wrong they have been able to bully their way through whatever situation they were wrong about. While many of them have been derided as social nerds, they have sought protection in the group-think of whatever bubble world they can retreat to where they are very in tune socially with that bubble group. The trick is that they fool themselves into seeing their retreat as an advancement of science or a coalescing of knowledge groups. Thus when met with cognitive dissonance, not only are they completely uncomfortable with it because they just can't admit that there are things that they don't or can't know, but they must rally around whatever group-think with which they most closely align in order to protect their fragile world of #Knowledge.

Not sure I stated that clearly enough, but gotta go do real world, meat space work and it will have to do...

Pogonip

I'm 412th, Ian!

Ian

I presume you're pleased about that because 412 is, of course, the first letter of the Hebrew Bible.

Spiny Norman

Is this thread still a thing? WTF?

Geezer

412 is, of course, the first letter of the Hebrew Bible

Four-twelve is also the code name for Captain James T. Kirk.

Ian

You just made that up, didn't you?

Geezer

You just made that up, didn't you?

What's a four-twelve?

Ian

WTP,

That sounds very much like one of my ex-girlfriends. IQ of 140+, and the other day when I ran into her again she slipped into the conversation after a couple of beers that her pronoun is "they".

Farnsworth M Muldoon

...she slipped into the conversation after a couple of beers that her pronoun is "they".

Did she say "My pronoun is they", or, "Our pronoun is they" ?

Thus they have very little internal self-correcting mechanisms or doubts about what they know.

I thought I was wrong once, but I was mistaken.

jabrwok

Is this thread still a thing

Yes, yes it is.

Sonny Wayze

"Like Christmas morning it is gov'nor, as the dawn of a brand new page..."

Barkeep! A wee dram for the threadwinner, on me.

"she slipped into the conversation after a couple of beers that her pronoun is "they"."

I'm seriously considering changing my pronoun to 'Oy vey', but I fear that I won't be taken seriously.

Ian

Did she say "My pronoun is they", or, "Our pronoun is they" ?

The former. And she was using personal pronouns normally, apart from that one utterance. I'm almost tempted to read up on how "they" is meant to be used, but I like to retain the mystery and magic of some aspects of life, so I'm just going to guess that that's the word she wants others to use when referring to her and/or addressing her. But if we demanded these people be consistent in their own use of pronouns (refraining from using "I", etc.), that might be fun.

Incidentally, with her the thing is she thinks that on the astral plane she's a man. Hence her bisexuality, which (if anyone is wondering) ought to explain why I still like her. I could tell you a few stories about my time with the Wiccans if it looks like -- at any point, ever -- this thread is beginning to run out of steam. And if I've had enough to drink.

Or possibly that would finally bring it to a juddering halt.

PiperPaul

I thought WTP was going to go full Steve Martin there for a moment...

"What I Believe."

I believe in rainbows and puppy dogs and fairy tales.

And I believe in the family - Mom and Dad and Grandma... and Uncle Tom, who waves his penis.

And I believe 8 of the 10 Commandments.

And I believe in going to church every Sunday, unless there's a game on.

And I believe that sex is one of the most beautiful, wholesome and natural things... that money can buy.

And I believe it's derogatory to refer to a woman's breasts as "boobs", "jugs", "winnebagos" or "golden bozos"... and that you should only refer to them as "hooters".

And I believe you should put a woman on a pedestal... high enough so you can look up her dress.

And I believe in equality, equality for everyone... no matter how stupid they are, or how much better I am than they are.

And, people say I'm crazy for believing this, but I believe that robots are stealing my luggage.

And I believe I made a mistake when I bought a 30-story 1-bedroom apartment.

And I believe the Battle of the Network Stars should be fought with guns.

And I believe that Ronald Reagan can make this country what it once was - an arctic region covered with ice.

And, lastly, I believe that of all the evils on this earth, there is nothing worse than the music you're listening to right now. That's what I believe.

Farnsworth M. Muldoon

But if we demanded these people be consistent in their own use of pronouns (refraining from using "I", etc.), that might be fun.

"Our pronoun is they, so when you refer to me, I mean us, or is it we, when you refer to us we are they"

"OK, but what about him over there ?"

"No they are they too"

"I see, so you are they."

"No, we are they"

"I thought you are we ?"

"No, we are us."

"Lemme see if I have this straight, you are we, us, and they, and they are they, and both of they are us, but us are we ?"

Apologies to Abbott and Costello

The original Mr. X

Wow, 424 comments. This must be some kind of record.

Anyway, late to the party I know, but this example of flagrant mendacity (insanity? Difficult to tell if the person in question actually believes this nonsense) was too much not to share:

Last week, a manifesto written by a Google engineer surfaced; the manifesto resembles those of Rodger's and Lépine's

"Rodger" there is Elliot Rodger, who murdered six people in 2014, and "Lépine" is Marc Lépine, who murdered fourteen people back in 1989.

Geezer

Apologies to Abbott and Costello

When I first saw that routine on television in the fifties, I literally wet my pants laughing. It remains hilarious to this day.

jabrwok

"Lemme see if I have this straight, you are we, us, and they, and they are they, and both of they are us, but us are we ?"

Hmm, I think the Beatles beat you to is: "I am, he is, you are, he is, you are me and we are all together."

Farnsworth M. Muldoon

...but this example of flagrant mendacity (insanity? Difficult to tell if the person in question actually believes this nonsense)...

From this quote from her bio, you can bet the steamboat zer does.

I'm a transsexual man, and I have opinions about sex, gender, and cisnormativity....As a male programmer who has spent a lot of his life getting perceived as a female programmer, one of the accomplishments I'm most proud of is hosting/maintaining the Male Programmer Privilege Checklist for five years (originally written by Kake, extended by me and others). The current version of the Male Programmer Privilege Checklist resides on the Geek Feminism Wiki...I aspire to always speak and act with intersectionality in mind...

One wonders whether as a "man" she takes advantage of her, or his, or whatever, male programmer privilege.

Farnsworth M. Muldoon

I think the Beatles beat you to is...

Us are the non-gender assigned ovum person, they are the large flippered aquatic mammal that may be be threatened by global climate disruption, goo goo goo joob

Geezer

One wonders whether as a "man" she takes advantage of her, or his, or whatever, male programmer privilege.

For me, the question is whether [fill-in-the-pronoun] writes good code. If the link you provided is an example, I would say not.

Nate Whilk

These people need therapy.

Posted by: Rafi | August 08, 2017 at 09:05

No, they need deprogramming from the cult they're in.

Geezer

No, they need deprogramming from the cult they're in.

Does the Guild have a deprogramming booth? Can it be lent out?

Nate Whilk

What's a four-twelve?

Posted by: Geezer | August 12, 2017 at 16:20

Overacting. Let's go.

Geezer

Overacting. Let's go.

Well done. Your next drink's on me.

Spiny Norman

"Lemme see if I have this straight, you are we, us, and they, and they are they, and both of they are us, but us are we ?"

You-ness. Me-ness. Us-ness. We-ness.

Your-ness. My-ness. Our-ness. Happiness.


(The wedding vows in the hilarious, and woefully underappreciated film Serial.)

juliaeryn

I haven't commented as yet on this thread as I haven't felt I have had anything I could add. But thanks folks, it has been a fascinating ride.

Hal

. . the hilarious, and woefully underappreciated film Serial.

With Christopher Lee as the head of a gay motorcycle gang.

We are tough dudes.

Spiny Norman

That was unexpected, huh? o_O

Splotchy

Apropos of present state of gender choice, this (newly female) person makes some interesting points:

https://mobile.twitter.com/Cobratate

Original announcement and justification for not actually changing anything wrt appearance/actions/behaviour, continuing to have sex with girls and attract praise/fame:

https://mobile.twitter.com/Cobratate/status/896341954346328064

WTP

Not to keep the thread going or anything...OK, I lie...but still on topic...

One aspect that I have seen little discussion of is the sudden discovery by certain factions of a corporation's right to hire and fire based on their own policies. Another is the concern by supporters of our "victim" that he has lost his job. Two problems I have with this situation. One, rather minor, is anyone making the serious bank that a young guy with his credentials should be making should be able to deal with, should even be prepared for, a loss of income for a short period of time. It's not like he's unemployable in his field. I find it a bit hard to cry for the guy when people with far less bank and three kids in school has to deal with this in an environment where no one is going to stick their neck out for him.

The second, more obvious, is what is with this sudden discovery of private property rights? You can be fired for based on beliefs expressed outside of work now? So, if I attend a mosque where beliefs are expressed that violate HR's rules, I can be fired? But of course, nuance and shit, right? I guess it serves this guy right for not finding a religion in line with his science. As if.

TomJ

I don't think anyone upset that Comrade Damore lost his job would be any less upset that a hypothetical parent had to deal with similar enforcement of a monoculture. Indeed, it's Damore who stuck his neck out to try to challenge it, which is why he is being fêted, to the extent that that's happening.

Spiny Norman

It's not like he's unemployable in his field.

Well, that IS the goal of his former Google comrades.

WTP

I don't think anyone upset that Comrade Damore lost his job

I wouldn't say anyone. There are a few from what I have seen. But not the major point. Look, I admire the guy for saying anything at all. But as I understand it, and forgive me if I have it wrong as I've seen it reported more ways than I have the time to investigate, our "hero" only expressed his concerns amongst a group of skeptics completely unconnected to Google itself. His expressed beliefs only got back to Google because someone reported him to Google's HR. Again, as I understand it, he was then called to account by said HR to refute his heresy. His heroics do extend to his refusal to refute. So it's not so much sticking his neck out but rather simply being honest about what he believes to be true. I will wait patiently as Google addresses other employee's externally expressed beliefs that conflict with Teh Diversity.

Also, to US lawyers present, I'm curious about all this as it pertains to hiring. I work for a very small company and we are hiring. I am included on all interviews and have veto power to some degree. If I sense that a potential hire is...say...a socialist, and therefor believe that the nature of being a socialist obviously, tautologically, will conflict with our company achieving its goals, am I breaking any laws by voting him down?. Note I know should be asking our HR person this question but, well...he's an idiot and I lack the patience to listen to him drone on and on for 30 minutes in the answer to some of even the most simple questions. And if anyone asks, I never said that.

WTP

Well, that IS the goal of his former Google comrades.

Well, be that as it may, the man is of some significant use. His Google comrades, putting aside their fellow travelers using government control, which I see as outside the present problem space but definitely a concern, should have no influence on his ability to find reasonable work elsewhere. Yes, he may need to leave the People's Republic of Kalifornia, but hey...again, he should have the means and is in a much better position than the theoretical middle class guy with three kids I refer to above.

Ian

...anyone making the serious bank that a young guy with his credentials should be making should be able to deal with, should even be prepared for, a loss of income for a short period of time.

On the issue of whether we ought to feel less sorry for a single guy making over $100K a year than the hypothetical family with a combined income of half that, you could argue contra that the single guy has more potential future income to lose, and also that the family still has a welfare safety net. Then again, he’s a young guy and can probably get a job elsewhere, and will probably have some savings, and also expecting a family to fall back on welfare would be bad. So yeah, I agree that Damore was much more able to stick his neck out here.

But... it’s like saying that the achievements of the gentleman scientists of yore were somehow less magnificent because it was easier for them. My rebuttal would go along the lines that if good education and relative financial independence allows really outstanding achievement, rather than seeking to tear into those people we should perhaps consider the possibility that dependancy (including scientists who rely on govt/private funding, or academics who rely on the approval of peers to get and keep their jobs) is a bad thing, even though it’s purpose was and is to allow (respectively) free and rigorous inquiry.

We’re doing the same thing now with crowdfunding, of course: trying to give people like Peterson, Damore and Jack Phillips (of anti-gay-wedding-cake fame) the ability to survive against a hostile monoculture after the fact.

Ian

...our "hero" only expressed his concerns amongst a group of skeptics completely unconnected to Google itself.

I think you may be labouring under a misapprehension. The “skeptics@” list was just a group on Google’s internal message board.

WTP

The “skeptics@” list was just a group on Google’s internal message board.

OK, I see other reports and I stand corrected. There may still be an issue if said message board was established with the intent of fostering communication skeptical of ... well, whatever.

it’s like saying that the achievements of the gentleman scientists of yore were somehow less magnificent because it was easier for them

Not sure to which But.. of mine you refer or how you infer that, but such was certainly not what I meant. Though to your point for some it was, for others not so much. Whole other issue that I'm not particularly interested in pursuing at the moment, though one I have pondered in various context in the past.

if good education and relative financial independence allows really outstanding achievement, rather than seeking to tear into those people we should perhaps consider the possibility that dependancy...is a bad thing

Agree. Though more directly to what I was saying and meant to point out but forgot...I think it's a good thing, over all, that he was let go. It brings the problem more to the surface. One that has existed for decades but has finally festered and materialized in a place and manner that matters to enough people that it will now get discussed. Also, I would say it is overall a good thing for Mr. Damore. Even given that he is unhireable for a larger number of overly sensitive corporations, those corporations, to my mind anyway, may very well be on the decline. With that bad, there is the good that he is now noticed by a larger number of corporations and such that appreciate independent thinking and would never have known of him or known this positive aspect about him without this publicity. This is one instance where I would agree with there being no such thing as bad publicity. But of course, being of the nerdish type it wouldn't surprise me if he'd rather not be in the spotlight he's in. Whole other thing I'm just speculating on, but wth. Also on the positive side as I see it, he's a useful, productive member of society who was previously expending his efforts for/with what I see as a corporation comfortable with evil. He likely will be working for a corporation or organization more in line with, for lack of a better word, good. Evil loses, Good wins. That's a two point reversal, if you get my drift.

jabrwok

If I sense that a potential hire is...say...a socialist, and therefor believe that the nature of being a socialist obviously, tautologically, will conflict with our company achieving its goals, am I breaking any laws by voting him down?

Probably. That said, I don't think there should be any such legal restraints on hiring and firing policies in private companies (government agencies are another matter). If I want to open a business and hire only green-eyed, negroid, left-handed, lesbian dwarves, that *should* be my business and mine alone. The only role the government should play is in ensuring that I don't violate either my contractual obligations or the civil rights of my employees and customers.

Thus, Google should've been entirely within its rights to fire Damore for any reason or none at all (contingent on contractual language which might constrain Google's freedom in that matter). Of course we, the public, are free to agree or disagree with Google's reasoning on the matter and express our opinions with our wallets.

What the law actually says on any of this, I have no idea. I've long since given up on the notion that law and reason have anything more than a passing acquaintance with one another, if that.

WTP

Thus, Google should've been entirely within its rights to fire Damore for any reason or none at all (contingent on contractual language which might constrain Google's freedom in that matter)

Agree, to a significant extent. Legally, anyway. Though I believe there should be some sort of reasonable-and-customary type clause that, if not stated in an employment contract, should be emphasized when not present. Whether such should be required by law itself is a whole other annoying argument that I'm not interested in at the moment. Either way, a person professionally employed should be fully aware that effectively/realistically such a thing applies. And if not fully aware at the time of termination, should be mature enough to understand that they SHOULD have known this.

Again, to be clear, in the context of this incident, I 100% believe it was wrong for Google to fire this guy. Note, I said "wrong for". As in if I were a stockholder in Google, I would be very disappointed in how the company was being run because I believe in the long run that Google will suffer for this. Maybe not in a big way, maybe in a big way. Most likely in a way that we will never know. But to some degree I believe Google was more damaged by this incident than Mr. Damore was.

I've long since given up on the notion that law and reason have anything more than a passing acquaintance with one another, if that.

Yeah, when I have spoken of such in the past I have been informed by my "betters" that I don't understand nuance. Idiots. ;)

Ian

I broadly agree with what’s been said, and apologies WTP if I misconstrued your earlier remarks (though I think you could have been clearer). I would just add that even if there were a legal environment in the UK or the US where companies could hire & fire based on any criteria whatsoever, it’s nevertheless almost a given (and I assume this is why it hasn’t been stated as far as I recall in this thread so far) from an economic perspective that any company with a large enough base of shareholders (i.e., any non tightly-controlled family-owned company) would seek the best employees regardless of their appearance/sex/race/etc.; and I would go further and argue that they would also probably try to be as generous as they could in tolerating strangeness of character (inc. political views, etc.) as long as it didn’t interfere with the business. This doesn’t apply so much to customer-facing roles, of course.

So much, so yawn... we’re all familiar with the arguments I’m sure. We need to pick a different topic or this thread will never reach 500... (and BTW, David seems to have lost interest so I think we’re on our own now)

On another point, which might get us another couple of comments, I wonder how Google is now going to deal with the NLRB complaint being pursued against them on the grounds that their hiring practices are sexist against women? IANAL, but have they perhaps shot themselves in the foot by effectively closing the door to arguments based on the psychological literature as put forward by Damore? I have no idea whether that would have any bearing on the case anyway, just thought I’d mention it. Maybe they’ll just point out that they’ve spent $246m on that stuff so they’re making good faith efforts, etc.

This is really getting silly now. The sequel to my last:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FS5RPJQVh-Q

Ian

Maybe we could start talking about Fields of the Nephilim, since David isn't around anymore?

David

since David isn’t around anymore?

[ Mysterious rustling in bushes. ]

Ian

That was just a test. :ahem!:

David
The result [of the memo] was incandescent outrage, demonization of Damore, widespread “progressive” criticism of science, and potentially the most remarkable mischaracterization campaign in recent journalistic history (quite a feat)… A person could be forgiven for believing that if journalists and commentators fully understood statistical distributions and what they represent that there would have been less outrage. We shouldn’t be so sure, however, that knowledge or understanding has anything to do with the reaction, because Damore was actually exceptionally careful and clear. Still, for those interested, hopefully I can say a few interesting words about the topic.

A Primer On Statistics to Help Quell Your Outrage at the Google Memo.

WTP

though I think you could have been clearer

Without a doubt. I'm much better with software code...or so I like to believe. At least it's easier to control context with the curly braces...or parenthesis...or tags...well, you see my problem...

Ian

If there is such a difference [in preferences between men and women], and it is significant, this variable could dramatically skew the potential hiring pool for Google and tech more broadly without the problem having anything to do with discrimination. (Indeed, in this case, it’s the opposite of a problem because such a state represents an increase in fulfillment of individual liberty and thus with life satisfaction for women and men alike, with women standing more to gain due to lingering historical imbalances.)

But there must be more women in tech, whether they like it or not! “From each according to his [/her] ability...”

Any gendered difference in interest in tech doesn’t apply to anyone working as a software engineer at Google because, whatever the sex ratio in the relevant interval describing high enough interest may be, everyone working in tech at a firm like Google is in it.

A subtle point, I know, but perhaps the best made so far, at least for those interested in the minutiæ like me.

WTP

A Primer On Statistics to Help Quell Your Outrage at the Google Memo

Oh, that it would be so. Many of the most outraged appear to understand basic statistics. Or appear to have jobs that should require them to understand statistics. Certainly I would expect the CEO of Google to understand basic statistics. But such capacity to understand has done little to quell the outrage in many of these people. It only seems to make them want to scream louder. I submit this is due to what I described earlier is that our education system is far more rewarding of an ability to repeat what one has been taught than an ability to reason. Let me give a personal example that I'm sure I've repeated on these pages before...and please forgive my engineer language skills....

I had a statistics course in college where the instructor, a man with a PhD in statistics, did not understand the Monty Hall Problem. His insistence that "luck has no memory" overrode his capacity to understand that, while true, that aspect of statistics does not apply to the MHP. Students would argue with him, after class, but he never wavered. Even went so far as to argue this point with Marilyn vos Savant to the extent that she published his disagreement with her in one of her books. As a former student I found it humiliating. I often wonder if at some point Dr. McClure (? IIRC) ever did.

Ian

WTP,

Your previous comment explains exactly why Google want diversity. They don't want boring people like you & I who are willing to spend huge amounts of time building fibre networks on the weekend or -- dare I say it -- reaching some arbitrary and pointless goal involving, say, a certain number of comments on a fringe (but delightful!) website.

They don't care about us. Bastards.

We are the real heroes.

David

fringe

[ Faints with indignation. ]

Ian

mainstream?

Geezer

Maybe we could start talking about Fields of the Nephilim

Or why four-twelve is the code name for Captain James T. Kirk.

Farnsworth M. Muldoon

Or why four-twelve is the code name for Captain James T. Kirk.

This took some searching - Stan Freeburg's "St. George and the Dragon Net" Dragnet parody.

St. George: "I got you on a 412 too"
Dragon: "A 412 !? What's a 412?"
St. George: "Overacting."

Spiny Norman

A Stan Freeburg classic. I remember hearing that on the Dr Demento Show in the '70s.

Hal

fringe

[ Faints with indignation. ]

Quite so, I always had the impression that David was rather closer to The City than Edinburgh . . .

“Crime in multi-storey car parks. That is wrong on so many different levels.” Tim Vine (2011)

“When I was younger I felt like a man trapped inside a woman’s body. Then I was born.” Yianni (2015)

“I was playing chess with my friend and he said, ‘Let’s make this interesting’. So we stopped playing chess.” Matt Kirshen (2011)

. . . .

“Feminism is not a fad. It’s not like Angry Birds. Although it does involve a lot of Angry Birds. Bad example.” Bridget Christie (2014)

. . . .

“I think if you were hardcore anti-feminism, surely you wouldn’t call yourself ‘anti-feminism’ would you? You’d call yourself ‘Uncle Feminism’.” Jenny Collier (2016)

Geezer

Thanks to Farnsworth and Spiny for furthering the discussion about Captain James T. Kirk's code name, but the first correct answer was posted by Nate Whilk on August 13, 2017 at 02:53 (albeit without explanation).

Ian

Yet no-one has managed to solve the puzzle of why 412 is the first letter of the Bible.

Hal

Yet no-one has managed to solve the puzzle of why 412 is the first letter of the Bible.

Oh, that's because it's before the second word.

Farnsworth M Muldoon

Yet no-one has managed to solve the puzzle of why 412 is the first letter of the Bible.

412 is the first letter of the Torah only if you are into Hebrew mysticism and numerology.

Beit is numerically equal to the word “ta’avah,” which means “desire” or “passion” (412). In general, “ta’avah” connotes a negative human property. However, in several places “ta’avah” denotes the positive passion of thetzadik, the righteous man. One passage in Proverbs states: “He will fulfill the passion of the tzadik,” and a second says: “the passions of tzadikim are only good.” The “ta’avah” of G-d, the “Tzadik of the world,” is altogether above reason and logic. At this level one cannot ask “why.” As expressed by Rabbi Shneur Zalman of Liadi: “About passion, there can be no question.” As G-d is the essence of good so His passion is “only good.”

The first word, however is, בְּרֵאשִׁ֖ית, and, as we are reading right to left, the first letter is ב , and sometimes a bet is just a bet.

WTP

the righteous man...

Ezekiel 25:17: The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the inequities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men. Blessed is he who, in the name of charity and good will, shepherds the weak through the valley of the darkness. For he is truly his brother's keeper and the finder of lost children. And I will strike down upon thee with great vengeance and furious anger those who attempt to poison and destroy my brothers. And you will know I am the Lord when I lay my vengeance upon you.

...because I had to...

David

The first word, however is, בְּרֵאשִׁ֖ית, and, as we are reading right to left, the first letter is ב , and sometimes a bet is just a bet.

As is often the case, I have no idea what’s happening here.

Ian

412 is the first letter of the Torah only if you are into Hebrew mysticism and numerology.

Hmmm... I can only give you half a mark for this. You correctly state that the letter Bet (which is, as you say, the first letter of the first word of the Torah, “in the beginning”) equates to 412, but you haven’t shown knowledge of the reason why, suggesting it’s only for mystical reasons. It’s rather more prosaic than that.

Like the Greeks and Arabs, the Hebrews lacked separate numerals, so the letters of the alphabet double as such. Aleph is 1, Bet is 2, etc., Yod is 10, Tau is 400. When spelled out in full, the letter Bet is Bet-Yod-Tau; thus 2+10+400.

Of course, the fact that words are also numbers resulted in centuries of noodling by the rabbis to try to tease out the hidden meaning of passages in the Torah and other texts through making connections between words of the same numerical value (amongst other tricks), in what has been described most succinctly as “a crisis of the text”.

With respect to James Damore, in Biblical Hebrew his name could conceivably be spelled יעקב דאמור which equates to 433, the same as the word זכות which means “privilege”. In other words, the Cabala tells us that James Damore, being male, is an avatar of male privilege. And if we add one “for the concealed unity therein” (one of the tricks they used), we get 434 which is the letter Dalet spelled in full. The letter Dalet means “a door” (not mystically: every letter is also a word; e.g., Yod means “a hand”), which tells us symbolically that Damore was shown the door.

I’m not sure if these gematric speculations represent “a crisis of the comments”.

Farnsworth M Muldoon

It’s rather more prosaic than that.

Yes, but the prosaic leads to the mystic as described above, which makes the mystic meaning more significant. 412=412, OK, roger, got it, drive on. 412=another word with other meaning, cue eerie music, then drag in origin of bet meaning house as in God's house and we're off to the machloket races.

Ian

412=another word with other meaning, cue eerie music, then drag in origin of bet meaning house as in God's house and we're off to the machloket races.

Yes, quite. I don't think many would argue it's any more valid or useful than, say, the doctrine of the four humours in medicine, which was the dominant paradigm for much the same historical period. Gematria aside, though, some aspects of cabala (e.g., the theory of emanations) are not all that far removed from aspects of mathematics, physics and chemistry (e.g., the periodic table); or at least some parallels could be drawn. Not very useful parallels, I would think, but still.

Sporkatus
With respect to James Damore, in Biblical Hebrew his name could conceivably be spelled יעקב דאמור which equates to 433, the same as the word זכות which means “privilege”. In other words, the Cabala tells us that James Damore, being male, is an avatar of male privilege.

This is my favorite thing read today thus far.

David

Cathy Young interviews James Damore.

Farnsworth M Muldoon

This is my favorite thing read today thus far.

I don't know, my vote would be for that, and being shown the door.

Monty James

Lord in heaven, you guys are really going to push this thing to 500, aren't you?

prm

#PushThisThingTo500

Sporkatus

#PushThisThingTo500

In a trail of fire I know we will be free again
In this thread we will be one
In a trail of fire I'll post before you reply to me
Set your sights for the sun

prm

The Pendulum swings on to 500...

Sporkatus

The Pendulum swings on to 500...
Somebody's going to bring it on home. Not me with this post, of course, but soon.

Farnsworth M. Muldoon

Lord in heaven, you guys are really going to push this thing to 500, aren't you?

We would be remiss not to, besides, look at all the goodness herein, out of control SJWs, google idiocy, pickled hippo testiles, Hebrew numerology, who knows what marvels a new page will bring ?

Hal

Lord in heaven, you guys are really going to push this thing to 500, aren't you?

We would be remiss not to, besides,

Ehn, at ~81 or so, there is awhile to go . . .

In the meantime, the assorted scriptural analysis brought to mind someone's prayer---No, not as an answer to something, the prayer just popped into mind . . .

And shepherds we shall be.
For Thee, my Lord, for Thee.
Power hath descended forth from Thy hand.
That our feet may swiftly carry out Thy command.
So we shall flow a river forth to Thee.
And Teeming with souls shall it ever be.
In Nomine Patris, et Filii, et Spiritus Sancti.
Farnsworth M. Muldoon

Ehn, at ~81 or so, there is awhile to go...

Sure, 17 feet shy of the summit of Everest, meh, let's go back. There is no I in team, except in French.

PiperPaul

I was told there wouldn't be any math.

Hal

I was told there wouldn't be any math.

Oh, don't worry, there is only playing with the little beads, no math involved at all, just see the little beads and flick them up and down . . . .

ftumch

#PushThisThingTo500

I don't even remember where this thread started. It's just a thing.

WTP

Something that has been bothering me about this post is the comments concerning nothing but the pursuit on the next hundredth comment. Topics that remotely relate to the subject, I can accept. But these others which serve no other valid purpose except to drive the count up feel like cheating. Juvenile. Sophomoric at best.

And this makes what? 489?

Farnsworth M. Muldoon

Something that has been bothering me about this post is the comments concerning nothing but the pursuit on the next hundredth comment. Topics that remotely relate to the subject, I can accept.

Fine, here, this is relevant, and has nothing to do with #500. Nothing.

PiperPaul

Maybe the joke's on us and David upped the posts-per-page limit to 500 or something...

Hal

Topics that remotely relate to the subject, I can accept.

And while doing a bit of catchup reading, I finally noticed one of the headlines, on the /. site.

Google Fires Author of Divisive Memo On Gender Differences (bloomberg.com)
Posted by BeauHD on Tuesday August 08, 2017 @01:00AM from the cause-and-effect dept.

With comments, lots of detailed comments---being /., these being comments from rather a tech oriented background regarding what's going on at Google and such . . .

Geezer

Topics that remotely relate to the subject, I can accept.

Did you forget? This is the most polite thread on the interwebs. That alone is worth 500.

Monty James

Not much to offer that's on topic. Unethical to simply post for the sake of posting.

Hurrah, Damore! Boo, Google!
Hurrahdamore! Boogle!
Itsy titsy ho!

Not very much on topic, I admit.

Monty James

Feels like everyone's counting down the minutes till H-Hour. Going over the top. Stand in the door. Ramps down. The Big Push.

Spiny Norman

There was once another interesting and occasionally amusing free-for-all blog I used to frequent (before they went barking moonbat shortly after the election of the Teleprompter Jesus) that once had an "everlasting comment thread" that continued on for quite literally months - until it was finally closed after more than 2800 comments, most of the last 200 or so consisted of "Last!"

(It was an offshoot of the old LGF, before Charles went moonbat "Captain Queeg", or "Mad King Yertle" as one of the other "Banned Legion" of old-time regulars calls him. In case anyone is curious, "Discarded Lies", I think it was called. It may still be a going concern, but I haven't checked in years.)

Hal

#)$&_(#$&Y insomnia.

Hurrah, Damore! Boo, Google!
Hurrahdamore! Boogle!
Itsy titsy ho!

Lavalier sat in the prow and sang an ancient elvish lament to the heartbreaking timbre of steel drums:

"Dago, Dago, Lassi Lima rintintin
Yanqui unicycle ramar rotoroot
Telstar aloha saarinen cloret
Stassen camaro impala desoto?
Gardol oleo tebephon lumumba!
Ghappaqua havatampa muriel
U canleada horsta wata, bwana,
Butyu canna makit drinque!

Comsat melba rubaiyat nirvana
Garcia y vega hiawatha aloo.
O mithra, mithra, I fain wud lie doon!
Valdaree valdera, que sera, sirrah,
Honi soit la vache qui rit.
Honi soit la vache qui rit."

("Oh, the leaves are falling, the flowers are wilting, and the rivers are all going Republican. O Ramar, Ramar, ride quickly on your golden unicycle and warn the nymphs and drag queens! Ah, who now shall gather lichee nuts and make hoopla under the topiaries? Who will trim my unicorns? See, even now the cows laugh, Alas, alas." Chorus: "We are the chorus, and we agree. We agree, we agree, we agree.")

As the tiny boats passed round a bend in the river, Frito looked back in
time to see the Lady Lavalier gracefully sticking her finger down her throat
in the ancient elvish farewell.

Farnsworth M Muldoon

This is John Cameron Swayze for Timex Watches; Timex - Time is for Time, X for the unknown;

Reporting live for the Camel News Caravan; Camel, the cigarette your T-Zone says is best.

I am at the sidelines of this doughty British blog as it heroically powers, just like a brand new Studebaker - Studebaker, brand new for 1955, and the car for those with a liking for glamor and go !; its way towards the dizzying heights of 500 comments !

Remember to check back often and mark the time of this historic event on your Timex Watch; Timex, it takes a licking, and keeps on ticking, but if it doesn't, what the hell, they are so cheap, go buy another !

This is John Cameron Swayze signing off, and remember, more doctors smoke Camels than any other cigarette, shouldn't you ?

Ian

This seems an appropriate moment for me to weigh in again with a more mystical, theological tone.

I’m sure none of the following is original – somebody else has probably said it already, quite possibly on this blog – but it occurred to me upon observing the image “The burning of heretic Damore upon the ſtake of Google” that there are in fact some parallels to Catholicism in the SJW creed.

Firstly, transubstantiation of matter. If a man says he is a woman, or vice versa, then a magical transformation takes place to make it so, though no change in outward appearance be visible.

Secondly, the doctrine that the trinity of men, women and transgender are as one being (equal), but yet separate for employment purposes (diverse).

Just thought I’d mention it. How many comments is that now?

Farnsworth M Muldoon

How many comments is that now?

We are a couple short.

prm

Daaaaaaaaaaavid! Are we there yet?

The comments to this entry are closed.

For Amazon US use this link .

Your filthy consumerism supports this blog.

Blogroll