Addendum Memo Example: Fill & Download for Free

Before we address the “right” and “wrong” question, we should perhaps ask if Google’s actions were legal.California is an at-will employment state, which means that employers do not need to give cause for termination. They may fire you for very nearly any reason, good or bad. This would normally mean that whatever you think “right” or “wrong” is, Google was certainly within their legal right to dismiss him.Except…It appears that before termination, Damore had filed a charge with the National Labor Relations Board. If his dismissal were found to be in retaliation for that filing, then his termination would be illegal. Damore also may be protected under a California law which prevents employers from retaliating against employees who talk about illegal working conditions.It’s likely a legal question that can only be decided by the courts.Google Manifesto Author Just Might Have a Legal CaseBut getting to the issue of “right” or “wrong”, let’s first dismiss the idea that there is any First Amendment claim in this case. The First Amendment merely says that the government may not limit speech. It does not protect people from actions by other individuals or companies (including termination) as a consequence of their speech. If, for instance, Hobby Lobby decided to fire me in an at-will employment state because they disapproved of my atheism, I have no First Amendment claim against them.I’ll proceed therefore with the idea that the termination was legal.But was his termination “right”?My thinking aligns with Google in this matter. Yes, I think it was right. I think his memo was lazy and self serving, and disparaging of women and minority candidates in general. It also denies the reality of bias and discrimination in the tech field, even while trying to couch it in language of rationality and reason.These issues are complicated and difficult, but pretending that the reason that women are under represented in tech because of some sort of biological determinism is just not correct. Google is a company that aspires to reach every human on the planet. I think the ideas of white male software engineers are somehow uniquely useful in that regard is pretty questionable.Addendum: One sure fire way to have your comment deleted is to repeatedly claim that I didn’t read the article. I did, and understand it completely. If you have a different opinion about it, feel free to write up your own answer to the question.

Kevin Spacey, out of the acting biz.Nobody gets banned from Hollywood.“Hollywood” isn’t some monolithic blob. Hollywood is just a description of the entertainment industry, which now encompasses theatrical motion pictures, TV production, product that is streamed over the internet.What’s now called Hollywood is dominated by conglomerates that got their start as movie studios in Southern California, but now includes movie hubs at various points on the globe.So. Actors and actresses, directors or production designers, aren’t banned or excommunicated. There’s no central authority sending out memos and e-mails to that effect, and never has been. Every company does its own thing.Kevin Spacey, for one, has never been banned. His brand simply became toxic as individuals came forward and alleged that he had sexually harassed and/or assaulted them, and those allegations reached critical mass. And suddenly, no studio or conglomerate would hire him, because publically-owned companies are almost always risk and controversy adverse.Simple.Apart from Mr. Spacey (and others of his ilk), motion picture talent becomes unemployable for a wide variety or reasons: they have drug problems; they have drinking problems; they don’t play well with others. For example, Shia LaBeouf has had personal issues of one kind or another for years, and is well on his way to performing in neighborhood theaters (if he’s lucky) and nowhere else. Even so, there have been no Decrees of Banishment published against him.But there was one kind of “banning” that was widespread in the late 1940s and 1950s, and that was the Hollywood Blacklist. If you were known to have been a Communist Party member, you got yourself deep-sixed. This applied to actors, writers, directors, whomever. Labor unions and movie studios all participated in the blacklist, and most organizations got behind it. At the end of 1947, studio execs got together at the Waldorf Astoria in New York City and issued what came to be known as the Waldorf Statement:…We will forthwith discharge or suspend without compensation those in our employ, and we will not re-employ any of the 10 until such time as he is acquitted or has purged himself of contempt and declares under oath that he is not a Communist.On the broader issue of alleged subversive and disloyal elements in Hollywood, our members are likewise prepared to take positive action.We will not knowingly employ a Communist or a member of any party or group which advocates the overthrow of the government of the United States by force or by any illegal or unconstitutional methods.Roy Huggins, creator of Maverick, The Fugitive, The Rockford Files and other iconic television shows, participated in left-wing activities when a youth, and one day discovered he was on the Cold-War naughty list:I got [to the the studio] and found out that they wouldn’t let me on the lot. … I handed the guard my script and said to “give this to Mr. Sparks with my compliments,” and drove home. …I told my agent I’d been black-listed … so I wrote a spec script called Hangman’s Knot. I had heard there was a black market where black-listed writers could make money … but I didn’t want to do that. …Huggins sold Hangman’s Knot with his name on it to one of the studios, and discovered that studios were perfectly happy to buy scripts from blacklisted writers, just not employ blacklisted writers. What he also discovered was that some studios were even okay with hiring the blacklistee … if they wanted that script badly enough.This is what happened to Huggins. (See video, above. Roy H’s story is priceless.)My point in bringing up these long-ago events is to show (yet again) that Hollywood is not, and never has been, some giant automaton that bans anybody. Even at the height of the blacklist, a studio which had agreed publically not to hire a Commie, hired a Commie. It decided that act of disobedience was in its commercial self-interest, therefore screw the House of Un-American Activities Committee.Which brings me back to my original point. Even Shia LaBeouf can get his backside (and everything else) hired once in a long while. Even Kevin Spacey (maybe). And why? Because a corporate entity decides it wants to hire them.On the other hand, maybe the entities didn’t get the memo from Hollywood Central. Or a copy of the “Declaration to Ban LaBeouf/Spacey”. But I doubt it.Addendum: Roy Huggins describes what happened after the feature Hangman’s Knot was released and the HUAC discovered (via the picture’s screen credits), that Mr. Huggins and been … employed!

Most Chinese characters simultaneously represent morphemes [minimum units of meaning] and entire syllables. When taking rapid notes, less important morphemes can be left out; multiple strokes can also be run together or omitted altogether to save time.小兒科 “pediatrician” ([literally] 小 “small” + 兒 “child” + 科 “specialist”) can easily become 儿科 and the individual strokes run together in a form of writing often translated as grass script.Chinese shorthand, which uses very simple scribbles to stand for entire toneless syllables, also exists, but it is not very popular or well known. Running syllables together to make phrases or words reduces ambiguity.The blog writer for the sample above laments the fact that learning about it is almost impossible: 中文速記(中文速寫) (the link for “free” lessons seems to be dead: treat with caution). I had a PRC textbook sitting on my bookshelves somewhere, but I can’t seem to find it.Here is a textbook published in Taiwan:中文速記(24版)/start rantAs a linguist, one of the few things that makes me feel deep sadness about Taiwan’s cultural scene is how little average people care about Chinese language-related matters. Learning English, Japanese or other foreign languages is fine, but after junior high school, most people don’t even own a Chinese dictionary anymore.Walk into almost any medium-sized or large bookstore in Taiwan and ask to see books about linguistics (phonetics, etymology, semantics, dialectology etc.). You will either be greeted with a blank stare or they will point you to English (Japanese etc.) textbooks and dictionaries. If you specify that you specifically want books about Chinese linguistics, they might send you to the kiddie area (only children need dictionaries, don’t you know?).語言學家 “linguists” are assumed to be people who learn lots of languages (linguistics is a narrow subject for university-based scholars). Even practical applications, such as forensic linguistics or speech language pathology are almost unknown (a narrow specialty reserved for young children).Small example: Unless I missed the news, the 100th anniversary of Bopomofo (1918–2018), which has helped promote literacy among tens (if not hundreds) of millions of Chinese people for over a century, came and went without a single celebration anywhere.rant over/While checking facts for this post, I was amazed to come across a slick website for a company in Hunan Province that provides shorthand services (probably not the only such company in China): 長太同聲速記服務公司 長太同聲速記服務公司 Chángtài Tóngshēng Sùjì Fúwù Gōngsī / Charngtay Torngsheng Suhjih Fwuwuh Gongsy. Unthinkable in Taiwan.美女速錄師團隊 Měinǚ Sùlùshī tuánduì / Meeineu Suhluhshy Twanduey “A team of beautiful ladies: stenography-shorthand specialists”速记_速记服务_速记公司_速记员-长太同声速记服务公司速記 - Wikipedia mentions ten types of Chinese shorthand, Qing Dynasty, ROC and PRC:中国語の速記符号速記（手書き速記） 伝音快字（1896年） 閩腔快字 新字（1883年） 平民官話字母（1896年） 漢文快字（1917年に張才が考案） 中華国語最新速記術（1928年に汪怡が考案） 邦永速記術（1929年に張邦永が考案） 長風速記術（1929年に金長風が考案） 亜偉速記法（唐亜偉が考案） 人民速記法案（1952年に顔廷超が考案）#1 “take memos” is unclear, but I assume you are referring to some form of shorthand#2 “they don't have phonetic symbols” is a mistaken idea. 85% of Chinese characters are phonosemantic, where one part is a general semantic clue (a liquid, a creepy-crawly, a feeling …) and the other is a loose phonetic clue (sounds somewhat like X).[addendum from the comment section]My point is that Taiwanese (and perhaps most PRCers?) do not seem at all interested as adults in actively developing their practical verbal skills in Chinese, their native language:(1) writing better ad copy, essays, letters etc.(2) Eliminating verbal fluff. Extracting key ideas from long texts to produce summaries.(3) improving their vocabulary to be more precise (without resorting to rare or archaic words).(4) giving moving, convincing speeches; verbal skills for persuading childen, spouses, coworkers, neighborsThis is not theoretical linguistics. It is eminently practical and doable: go to Amazon to find books on these topics for adult native speakers of English (NOT for foreign learners, not for schoolchildren)