Obeying laws is the minimum bar for being a part of society. A higher bar is to follow a moral and ethical code that benefits society

Children do not understand consequences so we don't let them eat sugar all day long. Adults can buy whatever they want and could choose to eat a lot of candy. I don't know about you, but I made bad choices in my teens and 20s and have learned from them. I am no longer a child and understand consequences and responsibility.

Authoring hate should have consequences. When I was a child and we wanted to call people bad names, we had to say it to their faces, and we saw them cry or punch us in the face. We got immediate feedback and knew we hurt someone. Our friends might trust use less because they worry that we would turn on them someday.

Delivery of the hate should not have (legal) consequences. Should we push the keyboard vendor who made it possible for the author to write an article? The postal service for delivering the keyboard used to write the content? I think the intent of online forums is NOT to deliver hate and NOT to plan acts of domestic terrorism.

That being said, there is some ethical/moral responsibility of content providers to remove some content.

Agree that this isn't a language specific problem. I'm guessing it's a cultural problem.

Specifically, this is likely a requirements, testing, and module API problem. Any code I wrote in the 90s was poorly specified (no requirements) and I didn't write tests. Module APIs are more than function signatures, but include behavioral specifications, like who was supposed to delete this memory? What units were we supposed to be using? Systems were simpler back then, I could fit most of the finite state machine into my head. Security was at best an afterthought, but more likely, completely absent.

These days, people don't work on code bases for 20-30 years, but maybe stick around for four years. Test frameworks have had to evolve. Production code integrates with third party components. Everything is distributed. You can't manually test all user stories and hope to get all race conditions as people are overconfident with their multi-threading programming abilities.

These older code bases have some nice consistency to them as only a couple of developers have worked on them. However, there is a lot of context still stuck in their head that is no longer accessible

There is nothing magical about a particular programming language unless you enter the realm of high performance. It really comes down to

• what should you do (requirements)
• do you do it (testing)
• do you do it well (profiling)

Engineering is herd mentality that benefits from ideas from peers with diverse backgrounds.

Teams build and support bigger and better products than any one person could ever do.

Yet, you want to embrace diversity so your products don't miss market opportunities or better ways to do things. One way to do this is to create a safe ecosystem for everyone to throw crazy ideas out. You set the expectation that non-active talkers listen and the team fuse together the best ideas to come up with the next product.

This memo classified individuals into groups with behavior exceptions. The first problem is teams are too small for this (love the quote "sampling size of one is not statistics"). The second problem is the author is not a good writer as I could read the memo multiple ways. The best way is XXX group doesn't get what they deserve because of YYY. The worst way, which is how many will read it, is XXX group doesn't deserve YYY because they are XXX. Read the flawed data analysis in "The Bell Curve". The third problem is the behavioral exceptions of groups in this memo are insulting at best. I define myself, I honestly don't fit any labels.

I am the anti-minority in all ways (white, male, etc...). I'm not worried about "they took our jobs!". I will, however, make accommodations (as necessary) for people who are different than I am, and be tolerant for things I don't understand, because I realize that others view the world differently than I do, and I don't want to miss out on insight i am incapable of seeing.

I want my team to be awesome. Google did the right thing and cut the toxicity out. I read the proposal to "de-emphasize empathy" and I lost all sympathy for this guy. Affinity groups are a good thing. I don't want individuals on my team to feel vulnerable, I want them to feel safe enough to take risks so I can promote them.

I have never worked for google and have zero interest in ever working for Google.

I'm wondering if I get charged for this?

or join a volleyball and/or softball league. Meet some people

I recently joined crossfit. I'm terrible at crossfit, always finish dead last, but I'm in much better shape after three months than I have been in the past ten years