On 08/20/2017 11:03 AM, Shawn K. Quinn wrote:

On 08/15/2017 10:45 PM, #$%&#$ %&#$%&#$ #$%&ed forth an edited copy of a message to the People For Internet Responsibility mailing list.

This edited message contained many confusing edits, including edits to Lauren Weinstein's address, the name of the mailing list, its domains, and Lauren's social media URLs. These edits materially misrepresent the original source of the message as well as its content.

In the interest of accuracy I am including a copy of the message from Lauren himself without the edits.

----- Forwarded message from "PFIR (People For Internet Responsibility) Announcement List" -----

Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2017 10:05:09 -0700 From: "PFIR (People For Internet Responsibility) Announcement List" Subject: [ PFIR ] SciAmerican: Google Engineer Fired for Sexist Memo Isn't a Hero To: pfir-list@pfir.org

SciAmerican: Google Engineer Fired for Sexist Memo Isn't a Hero

https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/cross-check/google-engineer-fired-for-s...

He presents himself as a courageous defender of truth. Google, in contrast, is an "echo chamber" that is "intolerant of scientific debate and reasoned argument." Damore notes that Noam Chomsky, the linguist and social critic, once wrote: "The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum." But Chomsky has expressed abhorrence for research into cognitive differences between different groups. In his 1987 book Language and Problems of Knowledge Chomsky wrote: "Surely people differ in their biologically determined qualities. The world would be too horrible to contemplate if they did not. But discovery of a correlation between some of these qualities is of no scientific interest and of no social significance, except to racists, sexists and the like."

How can something be "of no scientific interest"? That's rather a "Ministry of Truth" sort of statement.

- - -

--Lauren-- Lauren Weinstein (lauren@vortex.com): https://www.vortex.com/lauren Lauren's Blog: https://lauren.vortex.com Google Issues Mailing List: https://vortex.com/google-issues Founder: Network Neutrality Squad: https://www.nnsquad.org PRIVACY Forum: https://www.vortex.com/privacy-info Co-Founder: People For Internet Responsibility: https://www.pfir.org/pfir-info Member: ACM Committee on Computers and Public Policy Google+: https://google.com/+LaurenWeinstein Twitter: https://twitter.com/laurenweinstein Tel: +1 (818) 225-2800 --- Impeach Trump --- _______________________________________________ pfir mailing list https://lists.pfir.org/mailman/listinfo/pfir

----- End forwarded message -----

On Sun, Aug 20, 2017 at 05:49:42PM -0700, Razer wrote:

On 08/20/2017 04:06 PM, Mirimir wrote:

...

On 08/20/2017 11:03 AM, Shawn K. Quinn wrote:

...

On 08/15/2017 10:45 PM, #$%&#$ %&#$%&#$ #$%&ed forth an edited copy of a message to the People For Internet Responsibility mailing list.

This edited message contained many confusing edits, including edits to Lauren Weinstein's address, the name of the mailing list, its domains, and Lauren's social media URLs. These edits materially misrepresent the original source of the message as well as its content.

In the interest of accuracy I am including a copy of the message from Lauren himself without the edits.

----- Forwarded message from "PFIR (People For Internet Responsibility) Announcement List" -----

Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2017 10:05:09 -0700 From: "PFIR (People For Internet Responsibility) Announcement List" Subject: [ PFIR ] SciAmerican: Google Engineer Fired for Sexist Memo Isn't a Hero To: pfir-list@pfir.org

SciAmerican: Google Engineer Fired for Sexist Memo Isn't a Hero

https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/cross-check/google-engineer-fired-for-s...

He presents himself as a courageous defender of truth. Google, in contrast, is an "echo chamber" that is "intolerant of scientific debate and reasoned argument." Damore notes that Noam Chomsky, the linguist and social critic, once wrote: "The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum." But Chomsky has expressed abhorrence for research into cognitive differences between different groups. In his 1987 book Language and Problems of Knowledge Chomsky wrote: "Surely people differ in their biologically determined qualities. The world would be too horrible to contemplate if they did not. But discovery of a correlation between some of these qualities is of no scientific interest and of no social significance, except to racists, sexists and the like." How can something be "of no scientific interest"? That's rather a "Ministry of Truth" sort of statement.

Because the only people who would really care are people with agendas, and that's the truth.

Yep, the only people who really care about facts, have an agenda, so STFU about these particular facts, or face the wrath of Razer, the intellectual fraud.

On Sun, Aug 20, 2017 at 07:48:39PM -0700, Razer wrote:

On 08/20/2017 06:35 PM, ZeNazi wrote:

...

...

Because the only people who would really care are people with agendas, and that's the truth. Yep, the only people who really care about facts, have an agenda, so STFU about these particular facts, or face the wrath of Razer, the intellectual fraud.

Example: the only people who promulgate holocaust denial are those who have something to gain from denying it.

Rr

Ps. I've never claimed to be an 'intellectual'. Ever.

Example: the only people who promulgate fascist aggression towards holocaust-deniers is Razer, who refuses to actually engage on the topic, rather continue to spout epithets and ad-hominems, all the whilst calling for violence against those who hold these (different from Razer's) views. "Yay" "true anarchist Razer" "he's so anarchist, he doesn't even abide facts". Razer, that's just thuggery.

On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 07:50:14AM -0700, Razer wrote:

On 08/21/2017 12:07 AM, Zenaan Harkness wrote:

...

On Sun, Aug 20, 2017 at 07:48:39PM -0700, Razer wrote:

...

On 08/20/2017 06:35 PM, ZeNazi wrote:

...

...

Because the only people who would really care are people with agendas, and that's the truth. Yep, the only people who really care about facts, have an agenda, so STFU about these particular facts, or face the wrath of Razer, the intellectual fraud.

Example: the only people who promulgate holocaust denial are those who have something to gain from denying it.

Rr

Ps. I've never claimed to be an 'intellectual'. Ever.

Example: the only people who promulgate fascist aggression towards holocaust-deniers is Razer, who refuses to actually engage on the topic, rather continue to spout epithets and ad-hominems, all the whilst calling for violence against those who hold these (different from Razer's) views.

To Zzz: Fascist aggression towards holocaust deniers? You're cracked. The only reason nobody engages you is because you're a fucking *credulous moron* who spams the list with hateful shit, and most sensible people ignore you. Either explicitly (with filters) or implicitly (by skipping past your nonsense). David Duke is not an authority on the holocaust, and neither are you. Fuck off back to your hole.

Self-defense against a sociopathic microscopic portion of humanity isn't Fascism. It's the body destroying a foreign organism.

Example, and sociopath's response:

On 08/22/2017 05:07 AM, Zenaan Harkness attributed a quote to me:

On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 07:50:14AM -0700, Razer wrote:

(((Razer))) wrote:

...

What's an ad-hom? Don't bother anyway, I'm really tough so I only call people Nazis! Eat my tough response, ZeeNazi!!

I didn't write that. But yeah. Don't bother. Rr

One more time for the record scumbag On 08/28/2017 02:57 AM, Scumbag wrote: (((Razer))) wrote:

...

...

What's an ad-hom? Don't bother anyway, I'm really tough so I only call people Nazis! Eat my tough response, ZeeNazi!!

I never wrote that. Rr

Captain Death Squad - You aren't funny. Which is sad, because I know you try so so hard! Keep trying... ever seen the King of Comedy? You're like a racist, dictator-worshipping version of an even *more* twisted DeNiro in that movie. I'm not sure who Jerry Lewis is in this analogy.. Trump, Duterte and Putin all seem a little on the nose.

On Aug 28, 2017, at 11:26 AM, Zenaan Harkness wrote:

At least you have relevant things to focus all that fear on - highlighting comedic snyde words which "no one" could ever have realized were a snyde comedic jab hinting at the truth of the fear you suppress.

Simply no one could have seen that.

Glad you picked up on this too-subtle-for-most roast.

Folks could be misled or something...

...

On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 07:29:24AM -0700, Razer wrote: One more time for the record scumbag

On 08/28/2017 02:57 AM, Scumbag wrote:

(((Razer))) wrote:

...

...

...

What's an ad-hom? Don't bother anyway, I'm really tough so I only call people Nazis! Eat my tough response, ZeeNazi!!

I never wrote that.

Rr

On 08/21/2017 08:12 AM, Mirimir wrote:

On 08/20/2017 03:48 PM, Razer wrote:

...

On 08/20/2017 06:35 PM, ZeNazi wrote:

...

...

Because the only people who would really care are people with agendas, and that's the truth. Yep, the only people who really care about facts, have an agenda, so STFU about these particular facts, or face the wrath of Razer, the intellectual fraud.

Example: the only people who promulgate holocaust denial are those who have something to gain from denying it.

Data is neutral. And you can't have a meaningful discussion without it. Re agendas, just about everyone has them. But the ones that we agree with tend to be less obvious. To the extent that we agree, anyway.

So about racism, for example. Some argue that various measurables are distributed differently in various races. Now of course, "race" is a nebulous term. More accurately, one would say population groups.

Allegations about such differences have clearly been exploited horribly. By slavers. By Nazis. By eugenicists in various cultures.

However, recognition of increased incidence of serious recessive mutations among the Ashkenazim has been very helpful medically. Likewise, the increased incidence of hypertension among African-Americans. Indeed, it may well turn out that medical practice in general ought to be optimized by gender and genetics.

Even solid data on differences in measurables that have been exploited by racists could arguably play beneficial roles. For example, in the design of educational curricula.

Anyway, advocating for ignoring some classes of data is dishonest, and ultimately counterproductive. In my opinion, as a scientist.

I would like to think he's not claiming people should ignore data, but that in his opinion it isn't highly relevant to his field of work, and speaking as an Ashkenaz, about Tay-Sacs... (wikipedia)

...It has been hypothesized that being a carrier may confer protection from another condition such as tuberculosis...[5]

Like GMO crops... The potential for REALLY FUCKING UP by, not misuse, but simply trying to 'repair' or 'improve' (some people consider herbicide resistance 'improved') a natural genetic 'defect' may outweigh the potential for any significant benefit. and there's the scapegoat effect Chomsky alluded to:

Jewish immigration to the United States peaked in the period 1880–1924, with the immigrants arriving from Russia and countries in Eastern Europe; this was also a period of nativism (hostility to immigrants) in the United States. Opponents of immigration often questioned whether immigrants from southern and eastern Europe could be assimilated into American society. Reports of Tay–Sachs disease contributed to a perception among nativists that Jews were an inferior race.[43]

Rr

...

Rr

Ps. I've never claimed to be an 'intellectual'. Ever. Whatever that is ;)

On 08/20/2017 10:48 PM, Razer wrote:

On 08/20/2017 06:35 PM, ZeNazi wrote:

...

...

Because the only people who would really care are people with agendas, and that's the truth. Yep, the only people who really care about facts, have an agenda, so STFU about these particular facts, or face the wrath of Razer, the intellectual fraud.

Example: the only people who promulgate holocaust denial are those who have something to gain from denying it.

Rr

In part that depends on the definition of "denial." I have not made a special effort to evaluate the claims pro and con, but from what I have seen it does appear that: 1) It definitely happened, no question about that, but 2) the numbers were significantly exaggerated, even above and beyond Zionist propaganda counting /all/ the casualties as Jewish. Lots of people would call that "Holocaust Denial." It's illegal to say say those things in Germany, last I heard.

Ps. I've never claimed to be an 'intellectual'. Ever.

People call Chomsky an "intellectual" so often that I have to wonder if it's on his business card and letterhead, and the short list of branding themes his publicist carries around. I would be more likely to call Chomsky an "ideologue." Every few years Chomsky makes a cluster of widely publicized statements indicating a rational, practical understanding of political affairs. But that appears to be loss leader material aimed at attracting attention, because soon after, widely publicized straight up Party Line propaganda follows. Me: "Has Chomsky gone off the reservation?" Me one week later: "Nope, back to the same old prollfeed for self identifying Middle Class Liberals." So when Chomsky says that studies with a potential to disclose information with beneficial medical applications is "of no value," he means "of no value to my mission as a propagandist." At one time, eugenics told us all about which "races" are morally and intellectually better or worse than others, which gave a lovely veneer of Scientism to the work of violent racist political factions. In reaction against this, the behavioral and social sciences adopted an equally politicized position that all humans are born as blank slates with identical potentials in every area, period, and set about proving it to the best of their ability. Today, this seems to have mostly sorted itself, and genetics, the prenatal chemical environment, and the impact of post-natal environmental imprints and conditioned responses are all recognized as contributory factors to cognitive and behavioral traits that vary from person to person. Propagandists need all-encompassing talking points; their audiences demand instant E-Z unchanging one size fits all answers and "If I don't provide them, someone else will." Never mind the cha-ching of the cash register in the background, and the resulting inability of their indoctrinated audiences to do anything but fight among themselves as directed while their rulers make all the decisions that control their lives and destinies. So they sigh, shake their heads sorrowfully and say "Some problems won't be solved in our lifetimes," and get back to work making things worse because the mortgage doesn't pay itself. :o/