Reality really seems to have a left wing bias and grok us well known to have right wing views directly forced on it where the rest it's likely more of an emergency property. Especially as grok used to be a different animal politically.
Those were all ultimately for profit companies. You can only get so far with basic science if some bean counter is looking for a return on investment in the near future.
What those companies did is notable, but I think you are overselling their contributions to science. We've gotten way more scientific advancement from publicly funded science. There are private companies allowed to do R&D all over the world. Publicly funded independed science research is what has set the US apart.
Just having keywords associated with DEI could get a project defunded. Thee government isn't just defunding liberal projects. Look at the millions being thrown out on ocean monitoring because the Trump admin thinks global warming isnt a problem if you don't monitor it.
A fair shot would be hiring based on qualifications and not race, relion, etc.
There seems to be no end to people wanting to perpetuate a status quo that advantages themselves.
You might feel differently if you were part of a group that faces discrimination at every turn.
How will you prove and prosecute supposed discrimination?
Usually someone who feels discriminated against will get legal representation, file a lawsuit, and use the discovery process to strengthen their case. They can compare their treatment to that of people who don't share their minority status. They can show internal communications. Call witnesses. compare the companies workforce to other similarly positioned companies.
> because what it really is is slowing down hiring processes and second guessing people's judgments
1. So what?
2. People's judgement should be second guessed if they're racist.
3. One of the easiest ways to reduce discrimination in hiring is to replace names on resumes with numbers before letting hiring managers access them. Which barely slows down anything and eliminates a variable that isn't relevant to the candidates qualifications.
>the clearest evidence we have of anyone doing that at scale in modern times is DEI programs in college
Congratulations you found the one place where a black person might have an advantage. Meanwhile virtually every other aspect of American society disadvantages black people and the supreme court ruled against those colleges.
College admissions and the job market are apples and oranges. It isn't actually safe to assume the same thing must be happening in both. It isn't. There's an unofficial affirmative action favoring white people across much of the job market.
I mean there is a tendency for people in the middle class to go all NIMBY and not want additional housing to be built which drives up the cost of housing. It's good that there's a middle class but there are also things that people in the middle class do that aren't good. Like drive f350s on their 40-minute commute to the office.
There's no such requirement to hire proportional amounts of every ethnicity. There are requirements not to discriminate. Which isn't the same thing.
When companies do make an effort to give everyone a fair shot there's a tendency for mediocre white men to lose out to more qualified minorities. The companies get better employees and more diverse perspectives.
Then those white men feel spurned. They imagine they weren't hired because they're white. It's an easier pill to swallow and then the next thing you know DEI is the great Satan of low IQ white men.
Billionares shouldn't exist. We shouldn't just tax them for the revenue. We should tax them to limit the undemocratic power that comes with excessive wealth.
Not when AI is directly resulting in increased greenhouse gas pollution. It's all of the above. Any source of greenhouse gas pollution is bad. Cars, planes, ships, AI data centers running on fossil fuel energy. It's all bad.
The earth is hotter than it's been in 125,000 years. Warming at a rate dozens of times faster than the fastest periods of natural warming. The oceans are 25% more acidic. The worlds ice sheets and glaciers are losing 1 trillion tons of mass per year.
Did Al Gore make a stupid prediction about arctic sea ice loss? Yes. Do you know who criticized him at the time? Climate scientists. Did you know Al Gore isn't a fucking scientist?
I fucking hate Al Gore. You know why? Because he made himself the face of the climate crisis and now every partisan fuck on the right can't see past that. It's overwhelming their rationality.